Congressional Record, Volume 151 Issue 100 (Thursday, July 21, 2005)

[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 100 (Thursday, July 21, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H6273-H6292]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

USA PATRIOT AND TERRORISM PREVENTION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2005

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 369 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the bill,
H.R. 3199.

{time} 1757

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 3199) to extend and modify authorities needed to combat
terrorism, and for other purposes, with Mr. Hastings of Washington
(Acting Chairman) in the chair.

[[Page H6274]]

The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier
today, amendment No. 8 printed in part B of House Report 109-178,
offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake), had been disposed
of.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9 printed in House
Report 109-178.

Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Berman

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 9 offered by Mr. Berman:
Add at the end the following:

SEC. 17. REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL.

(a) Reports on Data-Mining Activities.--
(1) Requirement for report.--The Attorney General shall
collect the information described in paragraph (2) from the
head of each department or agency of the Federal Government
that is engaged in any activity to use or develop data-mining
technology and shall report to Congress on all such
activities.
(2) Content of report.--A report submitted under paragraph
(1) shall include, for each activity to use or develop data-
mining technology that is required to be covered by the
report, the following information:
(A) A thorough description of the data-mining technology
and the data that will be used.
(B) A thorough discussion of the plans for the use of such
technology and the target dates for the deployment of the
data-mining technology.
(C) An assessment of the likely efficacy of the data-mining
technology in providing accurate and valuable information
consistent with the stated plans for the use of the
technology.
(D) An assessment of the likely impact of the
implementation of the data-mining technology on privacy and
civil liberties.
(E) A list and analysis of the laws and regulations that
govern the information to be collected, reviewed, gathered,
and analyzed with the data-mining technology and a
description of any modifications of such laws that will be
required to use the information in the manner proposed under
such program.
(F) A thorough discussion of the policies, procedures, and
guidelines that are to be developed and applied in the use of
such technology for data-mining in order to--
(i) protect the privacy and due process rights of
individuals; and
(ii) ensure that only accurate information is collected and
used.
(G) A thorough discussion of the procedures allowing
individuals whose personal information will be used in the
data-mining technology to be informed of the use of their
personal information and what procedures are in place to
allow for individuals to opt out of the technology. If no
such procedures are in place, a thorough explanation as to
why not.
(H) Any necessary classified information in an annex that
shall be available to the Committee on the Judiciary of both
the Senate and the House of Representatives.
(3) Time for report.--The report required under paragraph
(1) shall be--
(A) submitted not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act; and
(B) updated once a year to include any new data-mining
technologies.
(b) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Data-mining.--The term ``data-mining'' means a query or
search or other analysis of 1 or more electronic databases,
where--
(A) at least 1 of the databases was obtained from or
remains under the control of a non-Federal entity, or the
information was acquired initially by another department or
agency of the Federal Government for purposes other than
intelligence or law enforcement;
(B) the search does not use a specific individual's
personal identifiers to acquire information concerning that
individual; and
(C) a department or agency of the Federal Government is
conducting the query or search or other analysis to find a
pattern indicating terrorist or other criminal activity.
(2) Database.--The term ``database'' does not include
telephone directories, information publicly available via the
Internet or available by any other means to any member of the
public without payment of a fee, or databases of judicial and
administrative opinions.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 369, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Berman) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman).

Request for Modification to Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Berman

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment
be modified by the modification at the desk.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the modification.
The Clerk read as follows:

Modification to Amendment No. 9 by Mr. Berman:
In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted as section
17(a)(2)(H), insert the following:
``(H) Any necessary classified information, other than
intelligence sources and methods, in a classified annex that
shall be available to the Committee on the Judiciary of both
the House and the Senate, the House Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence, and the Senate Select Committee on
Intelligence.
(I) Any information that would reveal intelligence sources
and methods shall be available in a classified annex to the
House Permanent Select Committee and the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence.''

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the modification offered
by the gentleman from California?
Mr. SAXTON. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Chairman, I am in
strong opposition to the underlying amendment, and I also have great
concerns about the unanimous consent request.
Mr. Chairman, I believe the unanimous consent request is designed to
make minimal changes in the underlying amendment. I also believe that
the unanimous consent request is designed to make the bill less
objectionable to some Members and thereby encourage them to vote for
it.

{time} 1800

I am so opposed to the underlying amendment that I am therefore
opposed to the unanimous consent request.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SAXTON. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
Basically, this is an amendment supported, I am happy to say, by the
chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, that simply does one thing:
It requires the Attorney General to report to Congress once a year on a
survey that it seeks from other agencies of the Federal Government
surveying data-mining technologies in use or in development at federal
departments and agencies. The modification that I seek simply makes
clear that, first of all, any classified information will be submitted
in a classified annex and, secondly, that any information regarding
data-mining technologies that deals with the sources, intelligence
sources and methods, will be available only in the annex to the House
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence; in other words, that to the extent this
survey produces anything which should either be classified or deals
with sources and methods, the traditional procedures for where that
material goes will be maintained.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, further reserving the right to object, I
appreciate the gentleman's explanation. The underlying amendment makes
unnecessary disclosure of very sensitive information. It is burdensome
upon each of the departments that it requires this disclosure to be
brought forward, and as a matter of fact, the explanation that the
gentleman just gave saying that makes it only available to HPSCI and
SSCI, the two intelligence committees, does not include the Committee
on Armed Services, which has great responsibility for military defense
intelligence.
So I do object, Mr. Chairman.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman).
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, I have indicated to the body what my intention was, and
it will be my intention and one to be part of the legislative history
that we will ensure that, before this bill becomes law, information
about sources and methods go just where they have always gone. The
Committee on Armed Services does not get this information. Only the
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence gets this information. The
gentleman was wrong in his characterization.
Secondly, this imposes absolutely no burden on any other agency of
government other than the Attorney General and the Justice Department.
It lays out information that the Attorney General should seek from
other agencies. It imposes no obligation on those agencies to respond.
It does not encumber any sources or funds they do not want to spend,
and it simply asks the Attorney General to then compile

[[Page H6275]]

whatever information those agencies have chosen to provide to the
Attorney General into a report which will be sent public in the case of
information which is not sensitive and classified in an annex
classified where it does involve such information.
There is not one word in this bill that imposes a single mandate on
any other federal agency. The only obligation on the Attorney General
is to seek this information from the other agencies. There are no
sanctions. There are no mandates. There is no compulsion.
The reason, I would suggest to this body, that we will hear some
people raising concerns is because the Justice Department has
misrepresented the obligations of both it and other agencies under this
amendment.
The need for this amendment is that we have wasted millions and
millions of dollars on implementing database-mining activities which,
when they became public, produced such an outrage they were canceled.
We are trying to get an early start, show the people that these efforts
are protected, that they are targeted at sensitive information.
We could have introduced a bill or offered an amendment to ban data
mining. We did not do that. There is legislation to do that. We do not
want to tie the hands of our security agencies in gathering this
information. We simply want to provide a logical mechanism to gather
the information so that the American people can feel more comfortable
that what is being done is protected.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I rise, reluctantly, to claim the time in
opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
Earlier this afternoon my colleague and I talked about potential ways
to fix this amendment, and I think that we reached a consensus as to
perhaps how we could address the issues that we were concerned about
from an intelligence standpoint. But with the lack of the unanimous
consent request being accepted and also as we went through the process
this afternoon, we found out that a number of other chairmen also had
concerns about this amendment and how it might impact the various
government agencies that they had responsibilities for. Those include
the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter) from the Committee on
Armed Services, the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Oxley) from the
Committee on Financial Services, the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman
Tom Davis) from the Committee on Government Reform, and the gentleman
from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) from the Committee on International
Relations.
But specifically what happens here, the amendment in its base form, I
think, provides a potential to tip off terrorists to our intelligence
activities. It undermines terrorism investigations and perhaps will
disclose our intelligence sources and methods. The amendment requires
every federal department or agency publicly to report about its
information gathering. It requires exhaustive and detailed reporting on
how information is collected from public and certain government
databases and what kind of information is collected and how it will be
used.
In many contexts this report will be a reasonable effort to protect
privacy interests. In the intelligence and terrorism context, however,
this amendment threatens to seriously undermine our national security
interests.
I have a great degree of confidence that, as we move forward, we will
be able to reach accommodation. We just could not do it this afternoon
with the number of other committees that also had expressed concerns
with this amendment.
I look forward to working with my colleague, to working with our
other chairmen to put this amendment in a proper context. Right now it
would be foolish to potentially tip off al Qaeda, other terrorist
groups by providing them with any information, with providing them a
detailed roadmap of the sources and methods we are using to find them
and follow their activities.
At this time in this format, this amendment is unwise, potentially
harmful to our national security, and I reluctantly urge our Members to
oppose it.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), chairman of the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Berman-
Delahunt amendment. All it does is require a report to Congress on data
mining by agencies.
Let me say why this is important. At the end of the last decade,
before 9/11 and before the PATRIOT Act was even considered, the FBI had
set up a data-mining operation that went far beyond criminal and
intelligence investigations and compromised the privacy of literally
millions of Americans, and this was done without the knowledge of the
Congress of the United States, and it was only as a result of the fact
that it did not work and they wasted all of this money that the
Congress found out about it.
So I think that before any of the agencies go down this route, there
ought to be at least a tip-off to the Members of Congress. I grant the
Members that the amendment probably is not properly drafted and we can
fix this in conference, and I appreciate the commitment of the chairman
of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to do that, but I do
not think we should turn it down and send a message to the agencies
that they can data mine all they want and we are not going to do
anything about it.
Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding me
this time.
Mr. Chairman, I think we can meet some of the concerns expressed so
far without adopting this amendment.
Let us just back up for just a second. There is a lot of individual
information somewhere in the country in little pieces. The challenge we
have in the war on terrorism is looking around for those pieces that
matter and trying to fit them together. That is really what data mining
is. It is looking at various databases and coming up with the relevant
pieces of information and helping us to form a picture about what
really happens.
There has been some misunderstanding and I think some undue
controversy about that for we will never get all those pieces of
information together without these tools that help us do so. To the
extent this amendment adds additional reporting requirements and sends
a message that we want to discourage them in various agencies from
using those tools, I think, does a disservice.
Maybe there are some protections that we can come up with that help
address the concerns of the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary,
but I think to simply add more reporting requirements and have these
people filling out more paperwork when they really ought to be figuring
out who the terrorists are and what they are up to is a misuse of their
time.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, in the course of yielding to my next speaker, I just
want to remind the body it is one report, once a year, with anything
that would tip off anybody about anything that we would not want to
happen to be in a classified form, even in the amendment form without
modification.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Harman), ranking member of the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence.
Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time, and I rise in support of his amendment. As the chairman of the
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence just said, we did try to
work out a unanimous consent request. We agreed among us, but, sadly,
others in this body did not agree.
The chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary is right. This is a
modest amendment that will yield good information so that we will
proceed to do data mining in an efficient way consistent with
protecting the civil liberties of law-abiding Americans. That

[[Page H6276]]

is all it does. It requires only the Justice Department to prepare a
report, not the Defense Department and not other departments in the
government.
So my view is that we should vote for this amendment now and perfect
it later. I agree with the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary.
It will help us do data mining the right way, and America will be safer
for it.
Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Hunter), the chairman of the Committee on Armed
Services.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
I want to join with the chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence in opposing this amendment and just making the point that
sources and methods are important. His analysis and the analysis of his
experts and ours is that this would indeed compromise those
capabilities.
I think it is a real mistake to pass this amendment. I would hope the
House votes it down.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds.
The cynicism sometimes stuns me. I offered an amendment to ensure
that sources and methods only go to the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence, and a member of the Committee on Armed Services objects,
and then the chairman says we are not protecting sources and methods so
he has to oppose it.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1815

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, as I indicated earlier, the Berman amendment would
potentially undermine the intelligence community's ability in the
current form to collect information on terrorists by tipping the
terrorists off to our sources and methods.
The amendment would require disclosure of data mining sources and
methods used to collect information on terrorists and contains no
exemption for national security purposes.
The House has worked to increase the use of open source and other
information against foreign terrorists and others who seek to harm the
United States. The amendment applies onerous reporting requirements
that could dramatically restrict the use of such technologies to use
such resources to discover and respond to terrorist activities.
Finally, it would divert scarce government resources away from the
most critical fight that we have today, the fight against terror.
Join me, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the gentleman
from (Mr. Oxley), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), and the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) in opposing this amendment; not the
direction the amendment wants to go, but in the way this amendment is
crafted at this time and in this bill.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt), the cosponsor of this
amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) is recognized for 45 seconds.
Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Chairman, this has absolutely nothing to do
whatsoever with sending messages about terrorism. It is trying to find
out what is happening in the Federal Government today, and we do not
know. We have heard a lot today about oversight and accountability.
That is what we are trying to do here.
Remember the so-called Total Information Program that was the
brainchild of the former National Security Administrator that we funded
to the tune of $170 million, and then defunded it? It was too late. We
wasted $170 million. That is what this is about. It is providing the
tools to the United States Congress to do its constitutional job of
oversight.
Mr. Chairman, do you know what? We do not know what is happening.
That is the real secret as far as the American people are concerned. We
stumble on these things.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. I am
particularly concerned about the burdens the amendment would place on
two law enforcement entities within the jurisdiction of Committee on
Financial Services. Under this amendment, both the Office of Foreign
Assets Control (OFAC) and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
(FinCen), which are components of the Treasury Department that are on
the front lines of our country's efforts to detect and combat terrorist
financing, would be required to divert already scarce resources away
from law enforcement in order to comply with the amendment's overly
broad and unrealistic reporting requirements. Instead of monitoring
suspicious financial activity and following money trails that can lead
investigators to terrorist plots like the ones we have seen in recent
days in London, OFAC and FinCen would need to interpret undefined and
ambiguous terms used in the amendment such as ``specific individual's
personal identifiers'' or engage in analyzing all laws and regulations
governing various types of information in question.
The Committee I chair has extensive experience in the financial
services area with regimes that permit individuals to ``opt out'' of
information sharing arrangements. Such regimes require careful
balancing of personal privacy and law enforcement and national security
priorities and cannot be drafted on the fly without extensive
consultation with all interested parties. This amendment, in my
judgment, falls far short of the mark. I urge a ``no'' vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Berman).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
noes appeared to have it.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California
(Mr. Berman) will be postponed.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10 printed in House
Report 109-178.

Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Daniel E. Lungren of California

Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I offer an
amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 10 offered by Mr. Daniel E. Lungren of
California:
Add at the end the following:

SEC. ___. INTERCEPTION OF COMMUNICATIONS.

Section 2516(1) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (c)--
(A) by inserting before ``section 201 (bribery of public
officials and witnesses)'' the following: ``section 81 (arson
within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction),'';
(B) by inserting before ``subsection (d), (e), (f), (g),
(h), or (i) of section 844 (unlawful use of explosives)'' the
following: ``subsections (m) or (n) of section 842 (relating
to plastic explosives),''; and
(C) by inserting before ``section 1992 (relating to
wrecking trains)'' the following: ``, section 930(c)
(relating to attack on federal facility with firearm),
section 956 (conspiracy to harm persons or property
overseas),''; and
(2) in paragraph (j)--
(A) by striking ``or'' before ``section 46502 (relating to
aircraft piracy)'' and inserting a comma after ``section
60123(b) (relating to the destruction of a natural gas
pipeline''; and
(B) by inserting ``, the second sentence of section 46504
(relating to assault on a flight crew with dangerous weapon),
or section 46505(b)(3) or (c) (relating to explosive or
incendiary devices, or endangerment of human life, by means
of weapons on aircraft)'' before of ``title 49''.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 369, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren) and a Member opposed will each
control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E.
Lungren).
Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself
such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this is a fairly straightforward amendment. This
amendment deals with the predicate for the use of wiretaps under the
Federal Code.
Current law may not authorize the use of electronic surveillance in
criminal investigations of certain other crimes that terrorists are
likely to commit. This amendment would fill in a gap in the law by
adding six other predicates for the electronic surveillance and
monitoring under 18 U.S.C. 2516(1).

[[Page H6277]]

While we were considering this bill in committee, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Schiff) had an amendment which added a number of
offenses to the wiretap statute. They went all the way from fraud and
misuse of visas and violence at international airports, to offenses
relating to torture, offenses relating to terrorist attacks against
mass transportation, offenses of military-type training from foreign
terrorists, offenses related to explosive materials.
There are a number of others that I believe should be in that same
category that, unfortunately, we did not include when we considered his
amendment. This proposed language would permit the interception by wire
or by oral surveillance if the interception would provide evidence of
six different types of crimes:
One, arson within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction;
Two, offenses relating to plastic explosives;
Three, offenses related to attack on Federal facility with firearm;
Four, conspiracy to harm persons or property overseas;
Five, offenses relating to assault on a flight crew with dangerous
weapon;
Six, offenses related to explosive or incendiary devices, or
endangerment of human life, by means of weapons on an aircraft.
This amendment does nothing, nothing whatsoever, to affect the
standard of obtaining a wiretap. That remains the same. Rather, it
merely takes offenses which have a nexus with terrorism and gives law
enforcement the additional investigative tool to undercover evidence of
their commissions through a wire or oral surveillance.
The ability of law enforcement to intercept communications related to
these terrorism-related offenses is a critical aspect of the effort,
not only of uncovering evidence of the most dangerous life-threatening
activity, but also in strengthening our ability to apprehend these
perpetrators before they inevitably strike again.
That is probably the major focus of our efforts with this bill; that
is, how do we apprehend these perpetrators before they strike? Such
surveillance will better enable law enforcement to be proactive in
preventing future terrorist attacks.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. I yield to the gentleman from
Wisconsin.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I support the gentleman's amendment
and I hope we can adopt it fairly quickly. What this amendment does is
simply add the following predicates to allow law enforcement to go to a
judge to seek a wiretap order: Crimes of terrorism such as arson,
plastic explosives, attacks on a Federal facility with firearms, and
conspiracy to harm persons or property overseas.
I think all of these are legitimate predicates. I would hope the
gentleman's amendment is adopted, and thank him for yielding.
Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim
the time in opposition, but I am not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) is
recognized for 10 minutes.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this expands the wiretap authority, but it limits the
expansion to cases of terrorism. I would say to the gentleman from
California and to the chairman, if the rest of the bill had been
limited to terrorism, we would not have to be sitting up here arguing
half the night.
I agree with the gentleman, we want to be tough on terrorism, but we
don't want to open up the entire criminal code to these very expansive
powers. So in this case, I think it is an appropriate expansion of the
wiretap because it is limited to terrorism, and I thank the gentleman
for the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Zoe Lofgren).
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I would like to concur
with the comments made by the ranking member, the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Scott), and to thank my colleague from California for the
amendment, and just note that as I read through it and agreed with
this, and I thank the gentleman for offering the amendment, it occurs
to me that there are a few other items that perhaps should have been
included, and I am hopeful that the committee might, we do not have a
sunset, but we might actually spend some time scrubbing the code and
making sure that we have scooped them all up in an appropriate way.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I ask for an aye
vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11
printed in House Report 109-178.

Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Schiff

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 11 offered by Mr. Schiff:
Add at the end the following:

TITLE __--REDUCING CRIME AND TERRORISM AT AMERICA'S SEAPORTS

SEC. _01. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Reducing Crime and
Terrorism at America's Seaports Act of 2005''.

SEC. _02. ENTRY BY FALSE PRETENSES TO ANY SEAPORT.

(a) In General.--Section 1036 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (2), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(B) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4); and
(C) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) any secure or restricted area of any seaport,
designated as secure in an approved security plan, as
required under section 70103 of title 46, United States Code,
and the rules and regulations promulgated under that section;
or'';
(2) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``5 years'' and
inserting ``10 years'';
(3) in subsection (c)(1), by inserting ``, captain of the
seaport,'' after ``airport authority''; and
(4) by striking the section heading and inserting the
following:

``Sec. 1036. Entry by false pretenses to any real property,
vessel, or aircraft of the United States or secure area of
any airport or seaport''.

(b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of
sections for chapter 47 of title 18 is amended by striking
the matter relating to section 1036 and inserting the
following:

``1036. Entry by false pretenses to any real property, vessel, or
aircraft of the United States or secure area of any
airport or seaport.''.

``Sec. 26. Definition of seaport

``As used in this title, the term `seaport' means all
piers, wharves, docks, and similar structures, adjacent to
any waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,
to which a vessel may be secured, including areas of land,
water, or land and water under and in immediate proximity to
such structures, buildings on or contiguous to such
structures, and the equipment and materials on such
structures or in such buildings.''.
(d) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of
sections for chapter 1 of title 18 is amended by inserting
after the matter relating to section 25 the following:

``26. Definition of seaport.''.

SEC. _03. CRIMINAL SANCTIONS FOR FAILURE TO HEAVE TO,
OBSTRUCTION OF BOARDING, OR PROVIDING FALSE
INFORMATION.

(a) Offense.--Chapter 109 of title 18, United States Code,
is amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 2237. Criminal sanctions for failure to heave to,
obstruction of boarding, or providing false information

``(a)(1) It shall be unlawful for the master, operator, or
person in charge of a vessel of the United States, or a
vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, to
knowingly fail to obey an order by an authorized Federal law
enforcement officer to heave to that vessel.
``(2) It shall be unlawful for any person on board a vessel
of the United States, or a vessel subject to the jurisdiction
of the United States, to--

[[Page H6278]]

``(A) forcibly resist, oppose, prevent, impede, intimidate,
or interfere with a boarding or other law enforcement action
authorized by any Federal law or to resist a lawful arrest;
or
``(B) intentionally provide materially false information to
a Federal law enforcement officer during a boarding of a
vessel regarding the vessel's destination, origin, ownership,
registration, nationality, cargo, or crew.
``(b) Whoever violates this section shall be fined under
this title or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both.
``(c) This section does not limit the authority of a
customs officer under section 581 of the Tariff Act of 1930
(19 U.S.C. 1581), or any other provision of law enforced or
administered by the Secretary of the Treasury or the
Secretary of Homeland Security, or the authority of any
Federal law enforcement officer under any law of the United
States, to order a vessel to stop or heave to.
``(d) A foreign nation may consent or waive objection to
the enforcement of United States law by the United States
under this section by radio, telephone, or similar oral or
electronic means. Consent or waiver may be proven by
certification of the Secretary of State or the designee of
the Secretary of State.
``(e) In this section--
``(1) the term `Federal law enforcement officer' has the
meaning given the term in section 115(c);
``(2) the term `heave to' means to cause a vessel to slow,
come to a stop, or adjust its course or speed to account for
the weather conditions and sea state to facilitate a law
enforcement boarding;
``(3) the term `vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States' has the meaning given the term in section 2 of
the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (46 U.S.C. App. 1903);
and
``(4) the term `vessel of the United States' has the
meaning given the term in section 2 of the Maritime Drug Law
Enforcement Act (46 U.S.C. App. 1903).''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for
chapter 109, title 18, United States Code, is amended by
inserting after the item for section 2236 the following:

``2237. Criminal sanctions for failure to heave to, obstruction of
boarding, or providing false information.''.

SEC. _04. USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON OR EXPLOSIVE ON A
PASSENGER VESSEL.

Section 1993 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``, passenger vessel,''
after ``transportation vehicle'';
(B) in paragraphs (2)--
(i) by inserting ``, passenger vessel,'' after
``transportation vehicle''; and
(ii) by inserting ``or owner of the passenger vessel''
after ``transportation provider'' each place that term
appears;
(C) in paragraph (3)--
(i) by inserting ``, passenger vessel,'' after
``transportation vehicle'' each place that term appears; and
(ii) by inserting ``or owner of the passenger vessel''
after ``transportation provider'' each place that term
appears;
(D) in paragraph (5)--
(i) by inserting ``, passenger vessel,'' after
``transportation vehicle''; and
(ii) by inserting ``or owner of the passenger vessel''
after ``transportation provider''; and
(E) in paragraph (6), by inserting ``or owner of a
passenger vessel'' after ``transportation provider'' each
place that term appears;
(2) in subsection (b)(1), by inserting ``, passenger
vessel,'' after ``transportation vehicle''; and
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) by redesignating paragraph (6) through (8) as
paragraphs (7) through (9); and
(B) by inserting after paragraph (5) the following:
``(6) the term `passenger vessel' has the meaning given
that term in section 2101(22) of title 46, United States
Code, and includes a small passenger vessel, as that term is
defined under section 2101(35) of that title.''.

SEC. _05. CRIMINAL SANCTIONS FOR VIOLENCE AGAINST MARITIME
NAVIGATION, PLACEMENT OF DESTRUCTIVE DEVICES.

(a) Placement of Destructive Devices.--Chapter 111 of title
18, United States Code, as amended by subsection (a), is
further amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 2282A. Devices or dangerous substances in waters of
the United States likely to destroy or damage Ships or to
interfere with maritime commerce

``(a) A person who knowingly places, or causes to be
placed, in navigable waters of the United States, by any
means, a device or dangerous substance which is likely to
destroy or cause damage to a vessel or its cargo, cause
interference with the safe navigation of vessels, or
interference with maritime commerce (such as by damaging or
destroying marine terminals, facilities, or any other marine
structure or entity used in maritime commerce) with the
intent of causing such destruction or damage, interference
with the safe navigation of vessels, or interference with
maritime commerce shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned for any term of years, or for life; or both.
``(b) A person who causes the death of any person by
engaging in conduct prohibited under subsection (a) may be
punished by death.
``(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to apply
to otherwise lawfully authorized and conducted activities of
the United States Government.
``(d) In this section:
``(1) The term `dangerous substance' means any solid,
liquid, or gaseous material that has the capacity to cause
damage to a vessel or its cargo, or cause interference with
the safe navigation of a vessel.
``(2) The term `device' means any object that, because of
its physical, mechanical, structural, or chemical properties,
has the capacity to cause damage to a vessel or its cargo, or
cause interference with the safe navigation of a vessel.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--The table of sections for
chapter 111 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by
subsection (b), is further amended by adding after the item
related to section 2282 the following:

``2282A. Devices or dangerous substances in waters of the United States
likely to destroy or damage ships or to interfere with
maritime commerce.''.
(b) Violence Against Maritime Navigation.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 111 of title 18, United States
Code as amended by subsections (a) and (c), is further
amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 2282B. Violence against aids to maritime navigation

``Whoever intentionally destroys, seriously damages,
alters, moves, or tampers with any aid to maritime navigation
maintained by the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development
Corporation under the authority of section 4 of the Act of
May 13, 1954 (33 U.S.C. 984), by the Coast Guard pursuant to
section 81 of title 14, United States Code, or lawfully
maintained under authority granted by the Coast Guard
pursuant to section 83 of title 14, United States Code, if
such act endangers or is likely to endanger the safe
navigation of a ship, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned for not more than 20 years.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--The table of sections for
chapter 111 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by
subsections (b) and (d) is further amended by adding after
the item related to section 2282A the following:

``2282B. Violence against aids to maritime navigation.''.

SEC. _06. TRANSPORTATION OF DANGEROUS MATERIALS AND
TERRORISTS.

(a) Transportation of Dangerous Materials and Terrorists.--
Chapter 111 of title 18, as amended by section _05, is
further amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 2283. Transportation of explosive, biological,
chemical, or radioactive or nuclear materials

``(a) In General.--Whoever knowingly transports aboard any
vessel within the United States and on waters subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States or any vessel outside the
United States and on the high seas or having United States
nationality an explosive or incendiary device, biological
agent, chemical weapon, or radioactive or nuclear material,
knowing or having reason to believe that any such item is
intended to be used to commit an offense listed under section
2332b(g)(5)(B), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned
for any term of years or for life, or both.
``(b) Death Penalty.--If the death of any individual
results from an offense under subsection (a) the offender may
be punished by death.
``(c) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Biological agent.--The term `biological agent' means
any biological agent, toxin, or vector (as those terms are
defined in section 178).
``(2) By-product material.--The term `by-product material'
has the meaning given that term in section 11(e) of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2014(e)).
``(3) Chemical weapon.--The term `chemical weapon' has the
meaning given that term in section 229F(1).
``(4) Explosive or incendiary device.--The term `explosive
or incendiary device' has the meaning given the term in
section 232(5) and includes explosive materials, as that term
is defined in section 841(c) and explosive as defined in
section 844(j).
``(5) Nuclear material.--The term `nuclear material' has
the meaning given that term in section 831(f)(1).
``(6) Radioactive material.--The term `radioactive
material' means--
``(A) source material and special nuclear material, but
does not include natural or depleted uranium;
``(B) nuclear by-product material;
``(C) material made radioactive by bombardment in an
accelerator; or
``(D) all refined isotopes of radium.
``(8) Source material.--The term `source material' has the
meaning given that term in section 11(z) of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2014(z)).
``(9) Special nuclear material.--The term `special nuclear
material' has the meaning given that term in section 11(aa)
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2014(aa)).

``Sec. 2284. Transportation of terrorists

``(a) In General.--Whoever knowingly transports any
terrorist aboard any vessel within the United States and on
waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States or
any vessel outside the United States and

[[Page H6279]]

on the high seas or having United States nationality, knowing
or having reason to believe that the transported person is a
terrorist, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for
any term of years or for life, or both.
``(b) Defined Term.--In this section, the term `terrorist'
means any person who intends to commit, or is avoiding
apprehension after having committed, an offense listed under
section 2332b(g)(5)(B).''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for
chapter 111 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by
section _05, is further amended by adding at the end the
following:

``2283. Transportation of explosive, chemical, biological, or
radioactive or nuclear materials.
``2284. Transportation of terrorists.''.

SEC. _07. DESTRUCTION OF, OR INTERFERENCE WITH, VESSELS OR
MARITIME FACILITIES.

(a) In General.--Title 18, United States Code, is amended
by inserting after chapter 111 the following:

``CHAPTER 111A--DESTRUCTION OF, OR INTERFERENCE WITH, VESSELS OR
MARITIME FACILITIES

``Sec.
``2290. Jurisdiction and scope.
``2291. Destruction of vessel or maritime facility.
``2292. Imparting or conveying false information.

``Sec. 2290. Jurisdiction and scope

``(a) Jurisdiction.--There is jurisdiction, including
extraterritorial jurisdiction, over an offense under this
chapter if the prohibited activity takes place--
``(1) within the United States and within waters subject to
the jurisdiction of the United States; or
``(2) outside United States and--
``(A) an offender or a victim is a national of the United
States (as that term is defined under section 101(a)(22) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(22));
or
``(B) the activity involves a vessel of the United States
(as that term is defined under section 2 of the Maritime Drug
Law Enforcement Act (46 U.S.C. App. 1903).
``(b) Scope.--Nothing in this chapter shall apply to
otherwise lawful activities carried out by or at the
direction of the United States Government.

``Sec. 2291. Destruction of vessel or maritime facility

``(a) Offense.--Whoever intentionally--
``(1) sets fire to, damages, destroys, disables, or wrecks
any vessel;
``(2) places or causes to be placed a destructive device,
as defined in section 921(a)(4), destructive substance, as
defined in section 31(a)(3), or an explosive, as defined in
section 844(j) in, upon, or near, or otherwise makes or
causes to be made unworkable or unusable or hazardous to work
or use, any vessel, or any part or other materials used or
intended to be used in connection with the operation of a
vessel;
``(3) sets fire to, damages, destroys, or disables or
places a destructive device or substance in, upon, or near,
any maritime facility, including any aid to navigation, lock,
canal, or vessel traffic service facility or equipment;
``(4) interferes by force or violence with the operation of
any maritime facility, including any aid to navigation, lock,
canal, or vessel traffic service facility or equipment, if
such action is likely to endanger the safety of any vessel in
navigation;
``(5) sets fire to, damages, destroys, or disables or
places a destructive device or substance in, upon, or near,
any appliance, structure, property, machine, or apparatus, or
any facility or other material used, or intended to be used,
in connection with the operation, maintenance, loading,
unloading, or storage of any vessel or any passenger or cargo
carried or intended to be carried on any vessel;
``(6) performs an act of violence against or incapacitates
any individual on any vessel, if such act of violence or
incapacitation is likely to endanger the safety of the vessel
or those on board;
``(7) performs an act of violence against a person that
causes or is likely to cause serious bodily injury, as
defined in section 1365(h)(3), in, upon, or near, any
appliance, structure, property, machine, or apparatus, or any
facility or other material used, or intended to be used, in
connection with the operation, maintenance, loading,
unloading, or storage of any vessel or any passenger or cargo
carried or intended to be carried on any vessel;
``(8) communicates information, knowing the information to
be false and under circumstances in which such information
may reasonably be believed, thereby endangering the safety of
any vessel in navigation; or
``(9) attempts or conspires to do anything prohibited under
paragraphs (1) through (8),
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than
30 years, or both.
``(b) Limitation.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to any
person that is engaging in otherwise lawful activity, such as
normal repair and salvage activities, and the transportation
of hazardous materials regulated and allowed to be
transported under chapter 51 of title 49.
``(c) Penalty.--Whoever is fined or imprisoned under
subsection (a) as a result of an act involving a vessel that,
at the time of the violation, carried high-level radioactive
waste (as that term is defined in section 2(12) of the
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10101(12)) or
spent nuclear fuel (as that term is defined in section 2(23)
of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C.
10101(23)), shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for a
term up to life, or both.
``(d) Death Penalty.--If the death of any individual
results from an offense under subsection (a) the offender
shall be punished by death or imprisonment for any term or
years or for life.
``(e) Threats.--Whoever knowingly imparts or conveys any
threat to do an act which would violate this chapter, with an
apparent determination and will to carry the threat into
execution, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not
more than 5 years, or both, and is liable for all costs
incurred as a result of such threat.

``Sec. 2292. Imparting or conveying false information

``(a) In General.--Whoever imparts or conveys or causes to
be imparted or conveyed false information, knowing the
information to be false, concerning an attempt or alleged
attempt being made or to be made, to do any act that would be
a crime prohibited by this chapter or by chapter 111 of this
title, shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than
$5,000, which shall be recoverable in a civil action brought
in the name of the United States.
``(b) Malicious Conduct.--Whoever knowingly, or with
reckless disregard for the safety of human life, imparts or
conveys or causes to be imparted or conveyed false
information, knowing the information to be false, concerning
an attempt or alleged attempt to do any act which would be a
crime prohibited by this chapter or by chapter 111 of this
title, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more
than 5 years.''.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--The table of chapters at the
beginning of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
inserting after the item for chapter 111 the following:

``111A. Destruction of, or interference with, vessels or maritime
facilities..................................................2290''.

SEC. _08. THEFT OF INTERSTATE OR FOREIGN SHIPMENTS OR
VESSELS.

(a) Theft of Interstate or Foreign Shipments.--Section 659
of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in the first undesignated paragraph--
(A) by inserting ``trailer,'' after ``motortruck,'';
(B) by inserting ``air cargo container,'' after
``aircraft,''; and
(C) by inserting ``, or from any intermodal container,
trailer, container freight station, warehouse, or freight
consolidation facility,'' after ``air navigation facility'';
(2) in the fifth undesignated paragraph, by striking ``in
each case'' and all that follows through ``or both'' the
second place it appears and inserting ``be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both, but if
the amount or value of such money, baggage, goods, or
chattels is less than $1,000, shall be fined under this title
or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both'' ; and
(3) by inserting after the first sentence in the eighth
undesignated paragraph the following: ``For purposes of this
section, goods and chattel shall be construed to be moving as
an interstate or foreign shipment at all points between the
point of origin and the final destination (as evidenced by
the waybill or other shipping document of the shipment),
regardless of any temporary stop while awaiting transshipment
or otherwise.''.
(b) Stolen Vessels.--
(1) In general.--Section 2311 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
````Vessel'' means any watercraft or other contrivance used
or designed for transportation or navigation on, under, or
immediately above, water.''.
(2) Transportation and sale of stolen vessels.--
(A) Transportation.--Section 2312 of title 18, United
States Code, is amended--
(i) by striking ``motor vehicle or aircraft'' and inserting
``motor vehicle, vessel, or aircraft''; and
(ii) by striking ``10 years'' and inserting ``15 years''.
(B) Sale.--Section 2313(a) of title 18, United States Code,
is amended--
(i) by striking ``motor vehicle or aircraft'' and inserting
``motor vehicle, vessel, or aircraft''
(ii) by striking ``10 years'' and inserting ``15 years'' .
(c) Review of Sentencing Guidelines.--Pursuant to section
994 of title 28, United States Code, the United States
Sentencing Commission shall review the Federal Sentencing
Guidelines to determine whether sentencing enhancement is
appropriate for any offense under section 659 or 2311 of
title 18, United States Code, as amended by this title.
(d) Annual Report of Law Enforcement Activities.--The
Attorney General shall annually submit to Congress a report,
which shall include an evaluation of law enforcement
activities relating to the investigation and prosecution of
offenses under section 659 of title 18, United States Code,
as amended by this title.
(e) Reporting of Cargo Theft.--The Attorney General shall
take the steps necessary to ensure that reports of cargo
theft collected by Federal, State, and local officials are
reflected as a separate category in the Uniform Crime
Reporting System, or any

[[Page H6280]]

successor system, by no later than December 31, 2006.

SEC. _09. INCREASED PENALTIES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH MANIFEST
REQUIREMENTS.

(a) Reporting, Entry, Clearance Requirements.--Section
436(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1436(b)) is
amended by--
(1) striking ``or aircraft pilot'' and inserting ``aircraft
pilot, operator, owner of such vessel, vehicle or aircraft,
or any other responsible party (including non-vessel
operating common carriers)'';
(2) striking ``$5,000'' and inserting ``$10,000''; and
(3) striking ``$10,000'' and inserting ``$25,000''.
(b) Criminal Penalty.--Section 436(c) of the Tariff Act of
1930 (19 U.S.C. 1436(c)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``or aircraft pilot'' and inserting
``aircraft pilot, operator, owner of such vessel, vehicle, or
aircraft, or any other responsible party (including non-
vessel operating common carriers)''; and
(2) by striking ``$2,000'' and inserting ``$10,000''.
(c) Falsity or Lack of Manifest.--Section 584(a)(1) of the
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1584(a)(1)) is amended by
striking ``$1,000'' in each place it occurs and inserting
``$10,000''.

SEC. _10. STOWAWAYS ON VESSELS OR AIRCRAFT.

Section 2199 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not
more than one year, or both.'' and inserting the following:
``(1) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more
than 5 years, or both;
``(2) if the person commits an act proscribed by this
section, with the intent to commit serious bodily injury, and
serious bodily injury occurs (as defined under section 1365,
including any conduct that, if the conduct occurred in the
special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United
States, would violate section 2241 or 2242) to any person
other than a participant as a result of a violation of this
section, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not
more than 20 years, or both; and
``(3) if death results from an offense under this section,
shall be subject to the death penalty or to imprisonment for
any term or years or for life.''.

SEC. _11. BRIBERY AFFECTING PORT SECURITY.

(a) In General.--Chapter 11 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 226. Bribery affecting port security

``(a) In General.--Whoever knowingly--
``(1) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers, or
promises anything of value to any public or private person,
with intent to commit international terrorism or domestic
terrorism (as those terms are defined under section 2331),
to--
``(A) influence any action or any person to commit or aid
in committing, or collude in, or allow, any fraud, or make
opportunity for the commission of any fraud affecting any
secure or restricted area or seaport; or
``(B) induce any official or person to do or omit to do any
act in violation of the lawful duty of such official or
person that affects any secure or restricted area or seaport;
or
``(2) directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks,
receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of
value personally or for any other person or entity in return
for--
``(A) being influenced in the performance of any official
act affecting any secure or restricted area or seaport; and
``(B) knowing that such influence will be used to commit,
or plan to commit, international or domestic terrorism,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than
20 years, or both.
``(b) Definition.--In this section, the term `secure or
restricted area' means an area of a vessel or facility
designated as secure in an approved security plan, as
required under section 70103 of title 46, United States Code,
and the rules and regulations promulgated under that
section.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for
chapter 11 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:

``226. Bribery affecting port security.''.

SEC. _11. PENALTIES FOR SMUGGLING GOODS INTO THE UNITED
STATES.

The third undesignated paragraph of section 545 of title
18, United States Code, is amended by striking ``5 years''
and inserting ``20 years''.

SEC. _12. SMUGGLING GOODS FROM THE UNITED STATES.

(a) In General.--Chapter 27 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 554. Smuggling goods from the United States

``(a) In General.--Whoever fraudulently or knowingly
exports or sends from the United States, or attempts to
export or send from the United States, any merchandise,
article, or object contrary to any law or regulation of the
United States, or receives, conceals, buys, sells, or in any
manner facilitates the transportation, concealment, or sale
of such merchandise, article or object, prior to exportation,
knowing the same to be intended for exportation contrary to
any law or regulation of the United States, shall be fined
under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.
``(b) Definition.--In this section, the term `United
States' has the meaning given that term in section 545.''
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter
27 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following:

``554. Smuggling goods from the United States.''.

(c) Specified Unlawful Activity.--Section 1956(c)(7)(D) of
title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting
``section 554 (relating to smuggling goods from the United
States),'' before ``section 641 (relating to public money,
property, or records),''.
(d) Tariff Act of 1990.--Section 596 of the Tariff Act of
1930 (19 U.S.C. 1595a) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(d) Merchandise exported or sent from the United States
or attempted to be exported or sent from the United States
contrary to law, or the proceeds or value thereof, and
property used to facilitate the receipt, purchase,
transportation, concealment, or sale of such merchandise
prior to exportation shall be forfeited to the United
States.''.
(e) Removing Goods From Customs Custody.--Section 549 of
title 18, United States Code, is amended in the 5th paragraph
by striking ``two years'' and inserting ``10 years''.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 369, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Schiff) and a Member opposed each will control 10
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. Chairman, earlier this year I introduced the Reducing Crime and
Terrorism at America's Seaports Act of 2005 along with my colleague the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), chairman of the Committee on
the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Our legislation is aimed at filling a gaping hole in our defense
against terrorism and making America's ports, passengers and cargos
safer.
Today, I offer the text of this important legislation as an amendment
to the PATRIOT reauthorization bill, joined by my colleague the
gentleman from North Carolina (Chairman Coble) of the Committee on the
Judiciary, as well as the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes), another
colleague on the Committee on the Judiciary.
There are 361 seaports in the United States that serve essential
national interests by facilitating the flow of trade and the movement
of cruise passengers, as well as supporting the effective and safe
deployment of U.S. Armed Forces. These seaport facilities and other
marine areas cover some 3.5 million square miles of ocean area and
95,000 miles of coastline.
Millions of shipping containers pass through our ports each month. A
single container has room for as much as 60,000 pounds of explosives,
10 to 15 times the amount in the Ryder truck used to blow up the Murrah
Federal Building in Oklahoma City. When you consider that a single ship
can carry as many as 8,000 containers at one time, the vulnerability of
our seaports is alarming.
Many seaports are still protected by little more than a chain link
fence and in far too many instances have no adequate safeguards to
ensure that only authorized personnel can access sensitive areas of the
port. If we allow this system to continue unchecked, it may be only a
matter of time until terrorists attempt to deliver a weapon of mass
destruction to our doorstep via truck, ship or cargo container.
Strengthening criminal penalties, as the gentleman from North
Carolina (Chairman Coble) and I proposed with our bill and in this
amendment, is one way we can make our Nation's ports less vulnerable by
filling this hole in our defense against terrorism and making America's
ports, passengers and cargo safer.
This amendment makes common sense changes to our criminal laws to
deter and prevent terrorist attacks on our ports, our sea vessels, and
cracks down on the theft and smuggling of cargo.
I want to be clear, our amendment is intended to go after terrorists,
terrorist acts and other dangerous felons. There is no intention to
reach accidents or other unintentional acts that might occur at
seaports.
A substantially similar bipartisan version of our legislation has
already been reported favorably by the Senate Judiciary Committee and
is awaiting action by the full Senate.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H6281]]

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent claim the
time in opposition, even though I am not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Wisconsin
(Mr. Sensenbrenner) is recognized for 10 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment and hope that the committee
adopts it. It provides basic and much-needed protections for our
Nation's seaports, and it does so by strengthening the criminal code in
various areas where our seaports would be vulnerable to either a
criminal act or a terrorist act.
Let me state, however, that the Congress has not been sitting idly by
since 9/11 on the issue of protecting seaport security. The container
security initiative was passed by this Congress several years ago and
is being implemented, both in terms of better targeting of containers
that come into our ports, as well as security at the ports and
screening before the cargo actually arrives. But in terms of people
breaking into our ports, perhaps putting bad materials such as bombs or
biological or chemical materials in our ports and in the containers in
our ports, this is an amendment that is extremely essential.
For that reason, I would urge its adoption.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), the chairman of the
subcommittee and a lead cosponsor of this amendment. I want to thank
the chairman for his important work to bring this issue before the
House.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from California for
yielding me time.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment to reduce crime and
terrorism at America's seaports. This amendment is long overdue and
reflects the hard work and dedication of my colleagues, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Schiff), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes)
and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns) to an issue of critical
importance to our Nation's safety. I want to thank all of them for
their effort to this end.
The amendment that we are offering today will protect our seaports by
controlling access to seaports on sensitive areas, providing additional
authority to the Coast Guard to investigate vessels, prohibiting use of
dangerous weapons or explosives on a passenger vessel, protecting Coast
Guard navigational aides on waterways, prohibiting transportation of
dangerous materials by potential terrorists, prohibiting destruction or
interference with vessels or maritime facilities, increasing penalties
for illegal foreign shipments on vessels, increasing penalties for
noncompliance with manifest requirements, increasing criminal penalties
for stowaways on vessels, and, finally, increasing penalties for
bribery of port security authorities and officials.

{time} 1830

These measures are much-needed and long overdue. Again, I thank the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the gentleman from Virginia
(Mr. Forbes), and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns).
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Forbes).
Mr. FORBES. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Schiff-
Coble-Forbes amendment to H.R. 3199. I also want to thank the gentleman
from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), the chairman of the Subcommittee on
Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, as well as the gentleman from
California (Mr. Schiff), for their important work on this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, the edge of my district is only minutes from the Port
of Norfolk, one of the busiest international ports on the east coast of
the United States. More than $37 billion worth of goods pass through
Norfolk every year to travel on to all of the lower 48 States. Our
Nation's seaports are the arteries that keep our Nation's economic
heart beating.
But, unfortunately, our ports remain an attractive target to
terrorists and criminals. The Interagency Commission on Crime and
Security in U.S. Seaports concluded in their report that significant
criminal activity is taking place at most of the 12 seaports surveyed
by the commission. That activity included drug smuggling, alien
smuggling, cargo theft, and export crime.
That is why it is important that the House pass the Schiff-Coble-
Forbes amendment. This amendment sends a clear message to terrorists
and criminals that we will defend our Nation's ports. This amendment
says that there is no loophole or shortcoming in the law that you can
hide behind that will allow you to harm our Nation.
Many of my constituents are shocked to learn that it is not a crime
for a vessel operator to refuse to stop when ordered to do so by the
Coast Guard. If you have spent as much time on the waterways of our
harbors as I have, you know there are often only seconds that separate
a vessel occupied by terrorists and one of our commercial or naval
vessels docked at a pier.
You cannot legally evade the police on our Nation's highways, and the
same rule should apply to our Nation's waterways. While the Coast Guard
has the authority to use whatever force is reasonably necessary to
force a vessel to stop or be boarded, refusal to stop by itself is not
currently a crime. That changes today with this amendment.
The amendment we are offering today will further protect our seaports
by prohibiting the use of dangerous weapons or explosives on a
passenger vessel, prohibiting the transportation of dangerous materials
and terrorists, and further increasing penalties for bribery affecting
port security.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is vital to protecting our Nation's
ports. I want to express my appreciation for this amendment, and I urge
my colleagues to support the amendment.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), the ranking member of the
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for
yielding me this time. I would like to join my colleague from Virginia
in his interest in the security of the Port of Hampton Roads.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is well drafted to target the problem of
port security. It closes an apparent oversight in the fact that it is
not a Federal crime for a vessel operator to fail to stop when ordered
to do so by a Federal law enforcement officer, and makes it clear that
that is a crime. The penalties are increased penalties, but not
mandatory minimums, so the increases will make sense.
I will not, however, be supporting the amendment because it has
several new death penalties in it. It has death penalties, some of
which push the envelope on constitutionality, because some can be
imposed even if there is no intent to kill; they are broad enough to
even include deaths which result from violating the stowaway statute.
Mr. Chairman, death penalties cannot be a deterrent to suicide
bombers, so that part of the bill I think would not be helpful in terms
of port security. What we do need in port security is significant
increases in funding for port security, funding for bus and rail
security, funding for first responders. That is the kind of thing that
will make us safer. As to the other parts of the bill, I would like to
thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) and the other
cosponsors for their hard work in focusing us on port security, which
is desperately needed.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Stearns).
(Mr. STEARNS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished chairman of the
full committee for yielding me this time, and I thank the gentleman
from North Carolina (Mr. Coble) for his help here.
I rise, obviously, in support of the Coble-Schiff-Forbes amendment
and in favor of the underlying bill. This amendment I think is
important to update and improve our seaport security, which obviously
is very crucial to protecting America. It also includes three
provisions from my bill, H.R. 785, the

[[Page H6282]]

cargo theft bill; and it is an issue that I have been concerned about
for over 2 years, so I am very pleased that it is part of the bill.
Probably the most important thing with this amendment that we are
talking about this evening that it accomplishes is that it requires
that cargo theft reports be reflected as a separate category in the
Uniform Crime Reporting System, or the UCR, the data collection system
that is used by the FBI today, currently, no such category exists in
the UCR, which results in ambiguous data and an inability to track and
monitor trends.
So I am very pleased that the Committee on the Judiciary incorporated
that provision and also raised criminal penalties for cargo theft,
which is included in this bill.
As it now stands, Mr. Chairman, punishment for cargo theft is a
relative slap on the wrist. Throw in the fact that cargo thieves are
tough to catch, and what we have here is a low-risk, high-reward crime
that easily entices potential criminals. The sentencing enhancement
proposed in this amendment will go a long way in making a career in
cargo theft less attractive. So the authors of this amendment are to be
commended.
Last, this amendment includes a provision requiring the Attorney
General to mandate the reporting of cargo thefts and to create a
database containing this information, which will provide a valuable
source of information and will allow States and local law enforcement
officials to coordinate reports of cargo theft. This information could
then be used to help fight this theft in everyday law enforcement.
Mr. Chairman, this is a commonsense cargo theft provision, along with
efforts to strengthen our seaport security, vitally effective tools in
our war on terrorism. I want to thank my colleagues, particularly my
good friend, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), for their
help.
I rise today in support of the Coble/Schiff/Forbes amendment, and in
favor of the underlying bill.
This amendment proposes to update and improve our seaport security,
which is a crucial element to protecting America.
It also includes three critical provisions from my bill H.R. 785
regarding cargo theft, an issue that I have been concerned about for
some time now.
Cargo theft is a problem that has plagued our country for some 30
years, but continues unabated today. It is a problem that travels our
highways, threatens our interstate commerce and undermines our homeland
security. It is a problem that affects our entire country, costs tens
of billions of dollars each year, and demands a Federal response.
There is no doubt that stopping cargo theft and smuggling is a
national security issue. We know that terrorists can make a lot of
money stealing and selling cargo, not to mention the fact that
terrorists have a proven record of using trucks to either smuggle
weapons of mass destruction or as an instrument of delivery.
Many of the industries involved in delivering cargo: trucking,
shipping, and businesses--are genuinely concerned about how security
gaps expose cargo to terrorism. Law enforcement has the same concerns.
These groups support this legislation.
That's why the three particular provisions in this amendment relating
to cargo theft are so important.
Probably the most important thing this amendment accomplishes is that
it requires that cargo theft reports be reflected as a separate
category in the Uniform Crime Reporting System, or the UCR, the data
collection system that is used by the FBI today. Currently, no such
category exists in the UCR, resulting in ambiguous data and the
inability to track and monitor trends.
I am also pleased that the provision raising criminal penalties for
cargo theft is included in this bill. As it now stands, Mr. Chairman,
punishment for cargo theft is a relative slap on the wrist. Throw in
the fact that cargo thieves are tough to catch, and what we have here
is a low-risk, high-reward crime that easily entices potential
criminals. The sentencing enhancements proposed in this amendment will
go a long way in making a career in cargo theft less attractive.
And last, this amendment includes a provision requiring the Attorney
General to mandate the reporting of cargo thefts, and to create a
database containing this information. This database will provide a
valuable source of information that would allow State and local law
enforcement officials to coordinate reports of cargo theft. This
information could then be used to help fight this theft in everyday law
enforcement.
These common-sense cargo theft provisions, along with the efforts to
strengthen our seaport security, will be vital and effective tools in
our war on terror.
Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleagues on the Judiciary Committee for
including this language, and I urge this House to pass this amendment
and the underlying bill.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I want to take this opportunity to thank the chairman of the full
committee, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), and thank
the chairman of the subcommittee. When I offered this originally as
stand-alone legislation in connection with another bill as an
amendment, the chairman offered to work with me on this further down
the line; and every bit true to his word, he has been a great partner
to work with on this. I want to thank the gentleman from North Carolina
(Chairman Coble), and I want to thank our esteemed chairman of the full
committee for their work on this.
The numbers are quite startling: 141 million ferry and cruise ship
passengers, more than 2 billion tons of domestic international freight,
and 3 billion tons of oil move through the U.S. seaports. Millions of
truck-sized cargo containers are offloaded on to U.S. docks.
As a part of the homeland security authorization bill, the House took
some important steps to improve the screening of cargo by expanding the
container security initiative and refocusing it based on risk. But the
truth is that not every container can be inspected, and we need to use
other tools at our disposal to deter and punish those who would use our
seaports as a point of attack. I urge support for the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California
(Mr. Schiff) will be postponed.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12 printed in House
Report 109-178.

Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Coble

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 12 offered by Mr. Coble:
Add at the end the following (and make such technical and
conforming changes as may be appropriate):

SECTION 17. PENAL PROVISIONS REGARDING TRAFFICKING IN
CONTRABAND CIGARETTES OR SMOKELESS TOBACCO.

(a) Threshold Quantity for Treatment as Contraband
Cigarettes.--(1) Section 2341(2) of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by striking ``60,000 cigarettes'' and
inserting ``10,000 cigarettes''.
(2) Section 2342(b) of that title is amended by striking
``60,000'' and inserting ``10,000''.
(3) Section 2343 of that title is amended--
(A) in subsection (a), by striking ``60,000'' and inserting
``10,000''; and
(B) in subsection (b), by striking ``60,000'' and inserting
``10,000''.
(b) Contraband Smokeless Tobacco.--(1) Section 2341 of that
title is amended--
(A) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in paragraph (5), by striking the period at the end and
inserting a semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(6) the term `smokeless tobacco' means any finely cut,
ground, powdered, or leaf tobacco that is intended to be
placed in the oral or nasal cavity or otherwise consumed
without being combusted;
``(7) the term `contraband smokeless tobacco' means a
quantity in excess of 500 single-unit consumer-sized cans or
packages of smokeless tobacco, or their equivalent, that are
in the possession of any person other than--
``(A) a person holding a permit issued pursuant to chapter
52 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as manufacturer of
tobacco products or as an export warehouse proprietor, a
person operating a customs bonded warehouse pursuant to
section 311 or 555 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1311,
1555), or an agent of such person;

[[Page H6283]]

``(B) a common carrier transporting such smokeless tobacco
under a proper bill of lading or freight bill which states
the quantity, source, and designation of such smokeless
tobacco;
``(C) a person who--
``(i) is licensed or otherwise authorized by the State
where such smokeless tobacco is found to engage in the
business of selling or distributing tobacco products; and
``(ii) has complied with the accounting, tax, and payment
requirements relating to such license or authorization with
respect to such smokeless tobacco; or
``(D) an officer, employee, or agent of the United States
or a State, or any department, agency, or instrumentality of
the United States or a State (including any political
subdivision of a State), having possession of such smokeless
tobacco in connection with the performance of official
duties;''.
(2) Section 2342(a) of that title is amended by inserting
``or contraband smokeless tobacco'' after ``contraband
cigarettes''.
(3) Section 2343(a) of that title is amended by inserting
``, or any quantity of smokeless tobacco in excess of 500
single-unit consumer-sized cans or packages,'' before ``in a
single transaction''.
(4) Section 2344(c) of that title is amended by inserting
``or contraband smokeless tobacco'' after ``contraband
cigarettes''.
(5) Section 2345 of that title is amended by inserting ``or
smokeless tobacco'' after ``cigarettes'' each place it
appears.
(6) Section 2341 of that title is further amended in
paragraph (2), as amended by subsection (a)(1) of this
section, in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by
striking ``State cigarette taxes in the State where such
cigarettes are found, if the State'' and inserting ``State or
local cigarette taxes in the State or locality where such
cigarettes are found, if the State or local government'';
(c) Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Inspection.--Section 2343
of that title, as amended by this section, is further
amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking
``only--'' and inserting ``such information as the Attorney
General considers appropriate for purposes of enforcement of
this chapter, including--''; and
(B) in the flush matter following paragraph (3), by
striking the second sentence;
(2) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c);
(3) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new
subsection (b):
``(b) Any person, except for a tribal government, who
engages in a delivery sale, and who ships, sells, or
distributes any quantity in excess of 10,000 cigarettes, or
any quantity in excess of 500 single-unit consumer-sized cans
or packages of smokeless tobacco, or their equivalent, within
a single month, shall submit to the Attorney General,
pursuant to rules or regulations prescribed by the Attorney
General, a report that sets forth the following:
``(1) The person's beginning and ending inventory of
cigarettes and cans or packages of smokeless tobacco (in
total) for such month.
``(2) The total quantity of cigarettes and cans or packages
of smokeless tobacco that the person received within such
month from each other person (itemized by name and address).
``(3) The total quantity of cigarettes and cans or packages
of smokeless tobacco that the person distributed within such
month to each person (itemized by name and address) other
than a retail purchaser.''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following new subsections:
``(d) Any report required to be submitted under this
chapter to the Attorney General shall also be submitted to
the Secretary of the Treasury and to the attorneys general
and the tax administrators of the States from where the
shipments, deliveries, or distributions both originated and
concluded.
``(e) In this section, the term `delivery sale' means any
sale of cigarettes or smokeless tobacco in interstate
commerce to a consumer if--
``(1) the consumer submits the order for such sale by means
of a telephone or other method of voice transmission, the
mails, or the Internet or other online service, or by any
other means where the consumer is not in the same physical
location as the seller when the purchase or offer of sale is
made; or
``(2) the cigarettes or smokeless tobacco are delivered by
use of the mails, common carrier, private delivery service,
or any other means where the consumer is not in the same
physical location as the seller when the consumer obtains
physical possession of the cigarettes or smokeless tobacco.
``(f) In this section, the term `interstate commerce' means
commerce between a State and any place outside the State, or
commerce between points in the same State but through any
place outside the State.''.
(d) Disposal or Use of Forfeited Cigarettes and Smokeless
Tobacco.--Section 2344(c) of that title, as amended by this
section, is further amended by striking ``seizure and
forfeiture,'' and all that follows and inserting ``seizure
and forfeiture, and any cigarettes or smokeless tobacco so
seized and forfeited shall be either--
``(1) destroyed and not resold; or
``(2) used for undercover investigative operations for the
detection and prosecution of crimes, and then destroyed and
not resold.''.
(e) Effect on State and Local Law.--Section 2345 of that
title is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``a State to enact and
enforce'' and inserting ``a State or local government to
enact and enforce its own''; and
(2) in subsection (b), by striking ``of States, through
interstate compact or otherwise, to provide for the
administration of State'' and inserting ``of State or local
governments, through interstate compact or otherwise, to
provide for the administration of State or local''.
(f) Enforcement.--Section 2346 of that title is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(a)'' before ``The Attorney General'';
and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(b)(1) A State, through its attorney general, a local
government, through its chief law enforcement officer (or a
designee thereof), or any person who holds a permit under
chapter 52 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, may bring an
action in the United States district courts to prevent and
restrain violations of this chapter by any person (or by any
person controlling such person), except that any person who
holds a permit under chapter 52 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 may not bring such an action against a State or local
government.
``(2) A State, through its attorney general, or a local
government, through its chief law enforcement officer (or a
designee thereof), may in a civil action under paragraph (1)
also obtain any other appropriate relief for violations of
this chapter from any person (or by any person controlling
such person), including civil penalties, money damages, and
injunctive or other equitable relief. Nothing in this chapter
shall be deemed to abrogate or constitute a waiver of any
sovereign immunity of a State or local government against any
unconsented lawsuit under this chapter, or otherwise to
restrict, expand, or modify any sovereign immunity of a State
or local government.
``(3) The remedies under paragraphs (1) and (2) are in
addition to any other remedies under Federal, State, local,
or other law.
``(4) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to expand,
restrict, or otherwise modify any right of an authorized
State official to proceed in State court, or take other
enforcement actions, on the basis of an alleged violation of
State or other law.
``(5) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to expand,
restrict, or otherwise modify any right of an authorized
local government official to proceed in State court, or take
other enforcement actions, on the basis of an alleged
violation of local or other law.''.
(g) Conforming and Clerical Amendments.--(1) The section
heading for section 2343 of that title is amended to read as
follows:

``Sec. 2343. Recordkeeping, reporting, and inspection''.

(2) The section heading for section 2345 of such title is
amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 2345. Effect on State and local law''.

(3) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 114
of that title is amended--
(A) by striking the item relating to section 2343 and
inserting the following new item:

``2343. Recordkeeping, reporting, and inspection.''

; and
(B) by striking the item relating to section 2345 and
insert the following new item:

``2345. Effect on State and local law.''.

(4)(A) The heading for chapter 114 of that title is amended
to read as follows:

``CHAPTER 114--TRAFFICKING IN CONTRABAND CIGARETTES AND SMOKELESS
TOBACCO''.

(B) The table of chapters at the beginning of part I of
that title is amended by striking the item relating to
section 114 and inserting the following new item:

``114. Trafficking in contraband cigarettes and smokeless tobacc2341''.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 369, the gentleman
from North Carolina (Mr. Coble) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble).

Modification to Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Coble

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to modify the
amendment with the modification at the desk.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the modification.
The Clerk read as follows:

Modification to Amendment No. 12 offered by Mr. Coble:
In the matter proposed to be inserted as subsection (b) of
section 2346 of title 18, United States Code, by subsection
(f) after the period at the end of paragraph (1) insert ``No
civil action may be commenced under this paragraph against an
Indian tribe or an Indian in Indian country (as defined in
section 1151).''.
In the same matter in paragraph (2) insert ``, or an Indian
tribe'' after ``State or local government'' each place it
appears.

Mr. COBLE (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent
that the modification be considered as read and printed in the Record.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from North Carolina?

[[Page H6284]]

There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the modification?
There was no objection.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
A ``Dear Colleague'' went out today, and I will share it with my
colleagues. It says: ``The Coble amendment attacks tribal sovereignty.
The Coble amendment reverses two statutes of Federal Indian policy.
Oppose the Coble amendment.''
Well, oftentimes in this body, Mr. Chairman, we engage in semantical
wars, and I disagree with the choice of these words; but in any event,
we have resolved the differences.
Mr. Chairman, I urge the support of the modified amendment before us
to strengthen the Contraband Cigarette Trafficking Act, commonly known
as CCTA. Why should this provision be included in the PATRIOT Act, one
may ask? Criminal organizations, including terrorist groups, are using
contraband cigarettes to fund their organizations. The scam is
relatively easy and extremely lucrative. The criminals purchase
cigarettes in a State with a low excise tax and then transport them to
a high-tax State to sell. Many times they even counterfeit the tax
stamps to ensure that the cigarettes appear legitimate. Criminals can
make as much as $30 per carton for relatively little effort and risk.
A scheme that was uncovered illustrates the magnitude of this
problem. In 2003, a group of Hezbollah operatives were convicted of
buying cigarettes in my home State of North Carolina and selling them
in Michigan. They were using the proceeds of their operation to fund
the activities of Hezbollah. Law enforcement authorities across the
Nation believe these types of smuggling operations are a fast-growing
problem.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment would enhance the provisions of the CCTA
to enable law enforcement to prosecute more of these schemes. First,
the amendment would lower the threshold requirements for a violation of
the CCTA from 60,000 to 10,000 cigarettes. It would apply the CCTA to
smokeless tobacco as well, and impose reporting requirements on those
engaging in delivery sales of more than 10,000 cigarettes, or 500 cans
of packages of smokeless tobacco within a period of 1 month. Finally,
it would authorize State and local governments and certain persons
holding Federal tobacco permits to bring causes of action against
violators of the CCTA.
We must do everything we can to choke off this source of funding for
criminal organizations which, in turn, subsidize terrorist
organizations; and I urge adoption of the amendment.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. COBLE. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from North
Carolina for yielding.
Let me say that this amendment has a direct impact on the war against
terrorism. When he was testifying on the reauthorization of the PATRIOT
Act, Deputy Attorney General James Kolbe testified that the first
material support for a terrorism case to be tried before a jury
involved a group of Hezbollah operatives who had been operating a
massive interstate cigarette smuggling scheme. He also testified that
since that prosecution, material support charges have been used against
other cigarette smuggling plots in Detroit.
From this information, it is obvious that the terrorists are using
cigarette smuggling in order to help finance their activities, and that
is why the amendment offered by the gentleman from North Carolina is a
good amendment. It fits in with the antiterrorism tools that the
PATRIOT Act reauthorizes, and I would urge its support.
I would also say that as a result of the modification that the
gentleman from North Carolina has proposed, there is no longer a
question of tribal sovereignty. That has been taken care of in the
modification. So anybody who has read the ``Dear Colleague'' letter
that was sent out earlier today, that is now out of date, and it is
about as accurate as last year's calendar.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim
the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
I would point out that the comments of the gentleman from North
Carolina and the chairman of the committee have outlined the fact that
this has been worked out with all of the parties involved, and we have
no objection.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).
Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Chairman, I want to again thank and recognize the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner), the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Coble), and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott)
for bringing this amendment forward. I would just like to reiterate and
rise in support of this amendment.

{time} 1845

As the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) indicated, this
amendment is about stopping terrorists. And as we are deliberating on
this bill as a whole and the purpose being to do everything we can to
stop terrorism, this amendment speaks right to the point.
As the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble) indicated, there are
real cases that have been uncovered and have been tried in court in
which known terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah have been engaged
in the illegal trafficking of cigarettes from low tax states into high
tax states using that money to fund their terrorist activities. That is
what this amendment does. And as the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Sensenbrenner) has said, all the modifications make sure that there is
no impact on tribal sovereignty.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.
Mr. COBLE. I thank the gentleman from Virginia for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I will just say that I look forward to working with the
chairman of the full committee and the ranking member, as well as the
ranking member of the subcommittee to resolve any other issues that may
remain in conference.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I am glad that Mr. Coble offered language
to mitigate concerns over his amendment's impact on tribal sovereignty.
As initially drafted, the amendment by Mr. Coble could have had the
unintended effect of targeting tribal governments who are legitimately
involved in the retailing of tobacco products. With the help of Mr.
Cole and other Members, Mr. Coble has modified his amendment and has
incorporated language that will go a long way to protecting tribal
governments and tribal sovereignty. Specifically, a provision
stipulating that enforcement against tribes or in Indian country, as
defined in Title 18 Section 1151, will not be authorized by the pending
bill has been incorporated.
Support for tribal sovereignty is a bi-partisan issue and
collectively the Congress will continue to defend that fundamental
principal of law. I realize that there are other sections that may need
to be fixed as well because there has not been much time to refine the
entirety of the Coble provision and that further refinements may be in
order once we get to Conference with the Senate on this provision. I
understand that the rule of law of enforcement in Indian country will
fall to tribal governments and the Federal government will be protected
through further amendment and I pledge to work in conference to ensure
the rights of tribal governments are fully protected.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to address the amendment offered by
the gentlemen from North Carolina that relates to the Federal
Contraband Cigarette Trafficking Act. There is evidence that profits
from the illegal sales of tobacco products have been funneled to groups
whose interests are inimical to the safety of our country and its
people and the Congress should do all we can to ensure that source of
revenue is cut off.
However, Indian tribal governments that are legally involved in the
retailing of tobacco products are clearly not the types of entities we
are targeting with this provision.
As initially drafted, the Coble Amendment would have had the
unintended effect of targeting tribal governments who are legitimately
involved in the retailing of tobacco products.

[[Page H6285]]

With the great help of the gentlemen from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) I
understand an amendment has been incorporated that will go a long way
to protecting tribal governments and tribal sovereignty.
I also understand, however, that we have not had much time to refine
the entirety of the Coble Amendment and that further refinements need
to be made. It is my understanding that the gentlemen from North
Carolina has agreed to take up these outstanding issues in conference.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), as modified.
The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13
printed in House Report 109-178.

Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Carter

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 13 offered by Mr. Carter:
Add at the end the following:

TITLE __--TERRORIST DEATH PENALTY ENHANCEMENT

SEC. _01. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Terrorist Death Penalty
Enhancement Act of 2005''.

Subtitle A--Terrorist Penalties Enhancement Act

SEC. _11. TERRORIST OFFENSE RESULTING IN DEATH.

(a) New Offense.--Chapter 113B of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 2339E. Terrorist offenses resulting in death

``(a) Whoever, in the course of committing a terrorist
offense, engages in conduct that results in the death of a
person, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term
of years or for life.
``(b) As used in this section, the term `terrorist offense'
means--
``(1) a Federal felony offense that is--
``(A) a Federal crime of terrorism as defined in section
2332b(g) except to the extent such crime is an offense under
section 1363; or
``(B) an offense under this chapter, section 175, 175b,
229, or 831, or section 236 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954;
or
``(2) a Federal offense that is an attempt or conspiracy to
commit an offense described in paragraph (1).''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 113B of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following new item:
``2339E. Terrorist offenses resulting in death.''.

SEC. _12. DENIAL OF FEDERAL BENEFITS TO TERRORISTS.

(a) In General.--Chapter 113B of title 18, United States
Code, as amended by section _11 of this subtitle, is further
amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 2339F. Denial of Federal benefits to terrorists

``(a) An individual or corporation who is convicted of a
terrorist offense (as defined in section 2339E) shall, as
provided by the court on motion of the Government, be
ineligible for any or all Federal benefits for any term of
years or for life.
``(b) As used in this section, the term `Federal benefit'
has the meaning given that term in section 421(d) of the
Controlled Substances Act, and also includes any assistance
or benefit described in section 115(a) of the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of
1996, with the same limitations and to the same extent as
provided in section 115 of that Act with respect to denials
of benefits and assistance to which that section applies.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of the chapter 113B of title 18, United States
Code, as amended by section _11 of this subtitle, is further
amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``2339E. Denial of federal benefits to terrorists.''.

SEC. _13. DEATH PENALTY PROCEDURES FOR CERTAIN AIR PIRACY
CASES OCCURRING BEFORE ENACTMENT OF THE FEDERAL
DEATH PENALTY ACT OF 1994.

Section 60003 of the Violent Crime Control and Law
Enforcement Act of 1994, (Public Law 103-322), is amended, as
of the time of its enactment, by adding at the end the
following:
``(c) Death Penalty Procedures for Certain Previous
Aircraft Piracy Violations.--An individual convicted of
violating section 46502 of title 49, United States Code, or
its predecessor, may be sentenced to death in accordance with
the procedures established in chapter 228 of title 18, United
States Code, if for any offense committed before the
enactment of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement
Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-322), but after the enactment of
the Antihijacking Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-366), it is
determined by the finder of fact, before consideration of the
factors set forth in sections 3591(a)(2) and 3592(a) and (c)
of title 18, United States Code, that one or more of the
factors set forth in former section 46503(c)(2) of title 49,
United States Code, or its predecessor, has been proven by
the Government to exist, beyond a reasonable doubt, and that
none of the factors set forth in former section 46503(c)(1)
of title 49, United States Code, or its predecessor, has been
proven by the defendant to exist, by a preponderance of the
information. The meaning of the term `especially heinous,
cruel, or depraved', as used in the factor set forth in
former section 46503(c)(2)(B)(iv) of title 49, United States
Code, or its predecessor, shall be narrowed by adding the
limiting language `in that it involved torture or serious
physical abuse to the victim', and shall be construed as when
that term is used in section 3592(c)(6) of title 18, United
States Code.''.

SEC. _14. ENSURING DEATH PENALTY FOR TERRORIST OFFENSES WHICH
CREATE GRAVE RISK OF DEATH.

(a) Addition of Terrorism to Death Penalty Offenses not
Resulting in Death.--Section 3591(a)(1) of title 18, United
States Code, is amended by inserting ``, section 2339E,''
after ``section 794''.
(b) Modification of Aggravating Factors for Terrorism
Offenses.--Section 3592(b) of title 18, United States Code,
is amended--
(1) in the heading, by inserting ``, terrorism,'' after
``espionage''; and
(2) by inserting immediately after paragraph (3) the
following:
``(4) Substantial planning.--The defendant committed the
offense after substantial planning.''.

SEC. _15. POSTRELEASE SUPERVISION OF TERRORISTS.

Section 3583(j) of title 18, United States Code, is amended
in subsection (j), by striking ``, the commission'' and all
that follows through ``person,'' .

Subtitle B--Prevention of Terrorist Access to Destructive Weapons Act

SEC. _21. DEATH PENALTY FOR CERTAIN TERROR RELATED CRIMES.

(a) Participation in Nuclear and Weapons of Mass
Destruction Threats to the United States.--Section 832(c) of
title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting
``punished by death or'' after ``shall be''.
(b) Missile Systems to Destroy Aircraft.--Section
2332g(c)(3) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
inserting ``punished by death or'' after ``shall be''.
(c) Atomic Weapons.--Section 222b.of the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2272) is amended by inserting ``death or''
before ``imprisonment for life''.
(d) Radiological Dispersal Devices.--Section 2332h(c)(3) of
title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting ``death
or'' before ``imprisonment for life''.
(e) Variola Virus.--Section 175c(c)(3) of title 18, United
States Code, is amended by inserting ``death or'' before
``imprisonment for life''.

Subtitle C--Federal Death Penalty Procedures

SEC. _31. MODIFICATION OF DEATH PENALTY PROVISIONS.

(a) Elimination of Procedures Applicable Only to Certain
Controlled Substances Act Cases.--Section 408 of the
Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 848) is amended--
(1) in subsection (e)(2), by striking ``(1)(b)'' and
inserting (1)(B);
(2) by striking subsection (g) and all that follows through
subsection (p);
(3) by striking subsection (r); and
(4) in subsection (q), by striking paragraphs (1) through
(3).
(b) Modification of Mitigating Factors.--Section 3592(a)(4)
of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``Another'' and inserting ``The Government
could have, but has not, sought the death penalty against
another''; and
(2) by striking ``, will not be punished by death''.
(c) Modification of Aggravating Factors for Offenses
Resulting in Death.--Section 3592(c) of title 18, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (7), by inserting ``or by creating the
expectation of payment,'' after ``or promise of payment,'';
(2) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``section 2339E
(terrorist offenses resulting in death),'' after
``destruction),'';
(3) by inserting immediately after paragraph (16) the
following:
``(17) Obstruction of justice.--The defendant engaged in
any conduct resulting in the death of another person in order
to obstruct investigation or prosecution of any offense.''.
(d) Additional Ground for Impaneling New Jury.--Section
3593(b)(2) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (C);
(2) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following:
``(E) a new penalty hearing is necessary due to the
inability of the jury to reach a unanimous penalty verdict as
required by section 3593(e); or''.
(e) Juries of Less Than 12 Members.--Subsection (b) of
section 3593 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``unless'' and all that follows through the

[[Page H6286]]

end of the subsection and inserting ``unless the court finds
good cause, or the parties stipulate, with the approval of
the court, a lesser number.''.
(f) Impaneling of New Jury When Unanimous Recommendation
Cannot Be Reached.--Section 3594 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after the first sentence the
following: ``If the jury is unable to reach any unanimous
recommendation under section 3593(e), the court, upon motion
by the Government, may impanel a jury under section
3593(b)(2)(E) for a new sentencing hearing.''.
(g) Peremptory Challenges.--Rule 24(c) of the Federal Rules
of Criminal Procedure is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``6'' and inserting
``9''; and
(2) in paragraph (4), by adding at the end the following:
``(C) Seven, eight or nine alternates.--Four additional
peremptory challenges are permitted when seven, eight, or
nine alternates are impaneled.''.
Strike section 12.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 369, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Carter) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott)
each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter).
Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment, the Terrorist Death
Penalty Enhancement Act. This measure is a much needed reform for our
Federal criminal statutes to ensure that the death penalty is available
to deter and punish the most heinous crime in our country. We must
remain vigilant and united in sending out one clear message to the
terrorists; if you attack our country or threaten our national security
and we apprehend you, we will seek the ultimate penalty, the death
penalty, against you. This amendment makes needed reforms to ensure
that such punishment is carried out and is applied fairly, and is
applied swiftly when the facts justify the punishment.
Many of these same provisions were overwhelmingly passed by this
House last year as part of the 9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act,
but removed during conference with the Senate.
As a former State district judge for over 20 years I have presided
over five capital murder cases, three of which resulted in the death
penalty. I have a unique perspective on the criminal justice system and
I understand the importance of safety and the need for America to be
tough on its criminals. We must protect our neighborhoods from the
threat of violent crimes which, unfortunately, in today's world,
includes the threat of terrorist attacks. Congress must act to protect
U.S. citizens from such attacks and to bring justice to those who
threaten our freedom.
It is unimaginable to think that a convicted terrorist responsible
for American deaths could serve his sentence and be released back on
the American streets free to act as he chooses. My straightforward
legislation will make any terrorist who kills eligible for the Federal
death penalty. This legislation will also deny these same terrorists
any Federal benefits they otherwise may be eligible to receive. In my
experience as a judge, I have witnessed the death penalty used as an
important tool in deterring crime and saving lives. I believe it is
also an instrument that can deter acts of terrorism and serves as a
tool for prosecutors in negotiating sentences.
First, my amendment adds a new criminal provision to impose the death
penalty to any terrorist who, while committing a terrorist offense,
engages in conduct that results in the death of an individual.
Second, my amendment provides procedures for the death penalty
prosecution of air piracy crimes committed before the 1994 Federal
Death Penalty Act.
Third, my amendment treats terrorist offenses similar to treason and
espionage cases so that the government need only prove that such
offense created a grave risk of death and did not actually result in
the death of a person. For example, consider a terrorist attack as we
saw today in London, where a terrorist is carrying a deadly weapon,
could be a radiological weapon or device, and prior to the total
detonation of that bomb killing innocent civilians, he is caught by the
authorities and they prevent that attack. Under this bill he could face
the ultimate penalty of death.
In addition to these commonsense reforms, my amendment also
authorizes the death penalty for killing that results from
participation in nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction
threats against the United States, missile systems to destroy aircraft,
atomic weapons under the Atomic Energy Act.
Now, with the authorization of these new death penalties I have added
some commonsense clarification to the Federal death penalty which is
supported by the Justice Department. Let me highlight three of these.
First, my amendment adds a new statutory aggravating factor for
obstruction of justice and in particular the killing of any person
which is aimed at obstructing any investigation or prosecution.
Second, my amendment clarifies that juries must reach a unanimous
sentencing verdict one way or the other for life imprisonment or for
death. If the jury does not reach a unanimous sentencing verdict then
the government may seek a new sentencing hearing.
Third, my amendment authorizes a judge to proceed with a death
penalty case with less than 12 jurors if the excusal of the 12th juror
is justified by good cause. There is simply no reason to make witnesses
testify, juries sit again after a long and complex trial when a juror
for some reason becomes sick or for some reason is unable to serve.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 5 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. It provides for
the enactment of extremely controversial provisions which we have had
inadequate time to consider. We have not had the opportunity to hear
critical testimony on controversial aspects of this bill such as the
provision to apply the death penalty to offenses where no death
results, the change in alternative jury rules and peremptory challenge
rules, another change of the number of jurors needed to impose the
death penalty and other changes which could constitute constitutional
problems.
Another problem with the bill, it provides for expansion of the
Federal death penalty, both for crimes that the supporters of the death
penalty might think warrant the death penalty, as well as crimes that
most people would not expect to be associated with the most severe of
penalties.
This bill does not limit crimes through the death penalty eligibility
to the heinous crimes or those who have traditionally been considered
severe enough to require either a death penalty or even life without
parole.
The bill is so broad that it includes offenses such as those related
to protection of computers, property offenses and financial or other
material support provisions. Because the bill makes attempts and
conspiracies to commit such crimes death penalty eligible, it covers
those who may have only had a minor role in the offense. If a death
results, even if it was not the specific intended result, anyone who is
involved in committing or attempting to commit or conspiring to commit
the covert offense would be eligible for the death penalty.
The provisions of this bill create a death penalty liability
tantamount to a Federal felony murder rule, and it presents
constitutional issues as well as questions of the appropriateness of
the death penalty in certain cases.
The provisions of this bill will be duplicative of state jurisdiction
laws in many instances and actually conflicting with others. One such
conflict would be where a State has chosen not to authorize capital
punishment and the Federal Government pursues the death penalty against
that State's wishes.
Another concern we always have to consider is expansion of the death
penalty when we know that there is a frequent error rate in applying
the death penalty. One study showed that 68 percent of the death
penalty decisions by the trial court were eventually overturned.
Mr. Chairman, there is another conflict or difficulty that will arise
in the efforts to further international cooperation in pursuing
suspected terrorists. We are already experiencing difficulties in
securing the cooperation of

[[Page H6287]]

the rest of the civilized world in bringing terrorists to justice due
to our existing proliferation of death penalty offenses when other
countries will not extradite criminals to the United States if they
will be subject to the death penalty. When we add these difficulties to
the other controversial issues as to whether someone who supports an
organization's social or humanitarian programs knows that it has been
designated as a terrorist organization it can only exacerbate the
difficulty and further undermine United States efforts.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I would remind my colleague from Virginia that a
legislative hearing was held before the subcommittee on June 30, 2005
on which the Justice Department testified in favor of this bill.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin
(Mr. Green).
Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. I thank the gentleman for yielding time.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment. The
gentleman from Virginia just stated that this amendment is
controversial. I am afraid I disagree. I do not believe it is
controversial in the least, and I think we will see that when the votes
are taken.
Mr. Chairman, we must do everything we can to stop terrorists, and
that starts with ensuring that all terrorist acts are punished swiftly
and severely. This amendment sends a clear message that we take
terrorism seriously, that we understand that terrorist acts are not
just crimes. They are acts of war, war against our way of life.
We must not waver in our message to those who wish to threaten the
values we hold dear. If a terrorist strikes on our soil we owe it to
the victims of an attack to punish those responsible with the heaviest
possible penalty, the death penalty. To do less would be a disservice
to those who have lost their lives and would send a signal of weakness
to those who are willing to use any means necessary to seek our
destruction.
The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter) described this amendment very
well so I will not run through it in detail. But let me say that this
amendment treats acts of terrorism just like treason or espionage
because that is what these acts truly are, not only crimes against
individuals but crimes against our Nation. Anyone who is thwarted in
their attempt to carry out an attack should not be spared the heaviest
penalty just because they were caught before they could carry out their
heinous intentions.
I was proud to work with the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter) on
this issue. I commend him for carrying this amendment forward. It is
good work that the gentleman is doing.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. It is very important
that we send a strong signal to the world that we take these acts
seriously, and serious acts deserve serious consequences.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Chairman, the sponsor of the amendment mentioned that hearing we
had. I would remind him that the hearing was a hearing on habeas
corpus, also the same hearing we heard the issue of the question of
whether the death penalty deters murder or other crimes, and this bill.
We were given one witness to cover all of that. Our witness covered
habeas corpus. We did not have the opportunity to invite a witness to
discuss this bill and the policy implications of death penalty where no
death occurs and alternate jury rules, peremptory challenges, the
number of jurors needed to impose a death penalty, all of these death
penalties involved.
So to suggest that that was a fair hearing, I think, does not do
justice to actually what happened on that day and the consideration of
this bill.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Zoe Lofgren), a member of the committee.
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, many of us, when we
think about terrorism, feel exactly the way the proponent of the
amendment does, that we want to exert maximum force against the
offender. Those who would kill deserve to pay the ultimate price.

{time} 1900

On the other hand, I am aware that there are people in our country
and in our Congress who for religious reasons do not believe in the
death penalty. The Pope did not believe in the death penalty and,
obviously, he was not for terrorism any more than our religious
colleagues who have that objection are for terrorism. So I think it is
important to state that.
I also want to say I am a member of the Committee on the Judiciary. I
have been for 10 years. If there was a hearing in the subcommittee that
I am not a member of all well and good, but I think this amendment
poses some new things that the full committee would benefit from going
through. The reduced number of jurors that is being proposed, the
procedural changes that are quite new, I think, deserve the attention
of the full committees. It is possible that this measure could run into
constitutional problems. And I think we would be better served to sort
through that in a thorough way than to expose these elements of the
PATRIOT Act to court challenge.
Finally, I would just say as I said before, even though we seek,
understandably, retribution against those who would do these horrible
crimes, I am just skeptical that imposing the death penalty is going to
deter the suicide bombers. Really, what we need to do is to spend the
time and the money to take steps to protect ourselves in a more
thorough way than we have done since 9/11.
As a member of the Committee on Homeland Security, I am acutely
aware, and we are on both sides of the aisle, I can tell you of the
shortfallings that we have in our protection against terrorism.
Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that the President of the United States on
two occasions has stated that we need to give our law enforcement
authorities all the tools necessary to fight terrorism, and he agreed
that he strongly supported the signal of a death penalty to deter this
criminal acts, these criminal acts that are imposed upon our society.
When I decided to run for Congress, it was in response to the 9/11
attack after serving for a long time on the judiciary. I am sponsoring
this legislation today because in my experience the death penalty does
deter crimes, and it is my hope and my prayer that this tool given to
our prosecutors and given to our courts and to our engineers will
enable us to better protect freedom and protect our citizens from this
disaster that lurks in the shadows along with these terrorists that
attack our Nation.
I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner) for
allowing me to offer this amendment and for all the great work that he
has done on this reenactment of the PATRIOT Act.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my
time.
As the gentleman said, we had a little piece of a hearing, but it was
not much; and we did not have the opportunity to discuss this bill. It
was not marked up in subcommittee or the committee. The committee
elected not to make it part of the bill, and I would hope that we would
make the same decision and defer this until it can be appropriately
considered. I oppose the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14
printed in House Report 109-178.

Amendment No. 14 Offered by Ms. Hart

Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 14 offered by Ms. Hart:
Add at the end the following:

[[Page H6288]]

TITLE __COMBATING TERRORISM FINANCING

SECTION _01. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Combating Terrorism
Financing Act of 2005''.

SEC. _02. INCREASED PENALTIES FOR TERRORISM FINANCING.

Section 206 of the International Emergency Economic Powers
Act (50 U.S.C. 1705) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by deleting ``$10,000'' and
inserting ``$50,000''.
(2) in subsection (b), by deleting ``ten years'' and
inserting ``twenty years''.

SEC. _03. TERRORISM-RELATED SPECIFIED ACTIVITIES FOR MONEY
LAUNDERING.

(a) Amendments to RICO.--Section 1961(1) of title 18,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ``section 1960
(relating to illegal money transmitters),'' before ``sections
2251''; and
(2) in subparagraph (F), by inserting ``section 274A
(relating to unlawful employment of aliens),'' before
``section 277''.
(b) Amendments to Section 1956(c)(7).--Section
1956(c)(7)(D) of title 18, United States Code, is amended
by--
(1) inserting ``, or section 2339C (relating to financing
of terrorism)'' before ``of this title''; and
(2) striking ``or any felony violation of the Foreign
Corrupt Practices Act'' and inserting ``any felony violation
of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or any violation of
section 208 of the Social Security Act (relating to obtaining
funds through misuse of a social security number)''.
(c) Conforming Amendments to Sections 1956(e) and
1957(e).--
(1) Section 1956(e) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended to read as follows:
``(e) Violations of this section may be investigated by
such components of the Department of Justice as the Attorney
General may direct, and by such components of the Department
of the Treasury as the Secretary of the Treasury may direct,
as appropriate, and, with respect to offenses over which the
Department of Homeland Security has jurisdiction, by such
components of the Department of Homeland Security as the
Secretary of Homeland Security may direct, and, with respect
to offenses over which the United States Postal Service has
jurisdiction, by the Postal Service. Such authority of the
Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Homeland
Security, and the Postal Service shall be exercised in
accordance with an agreement which shall be entered into by
the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Homeland
Security, the Postal Service, and the Attorney General.
Violations of this section involving offenses described in
paragraph (c)(7)(E) may be investigated by such components of
the Department of Justice as the Attorney General may direct,
and the National Enforcement Investigations Center of the
Environmental Protection Agency.''.
(2) Section 1957(e) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended to read as follows:
``(e) Violations of this section may be investigated by
such components of the Department of Justice as the Attorney
General may direct, and by such components of the Department
of the Treasury as the Secretary of the Treasury may direct,
as appropriate, and, with respect to offenses over which the
Department of Homeland Security has jurisdiction, by such
components of the Department of Homeland Security as the
Secretary of Homeland Security may direct, and, with respect
to offenses over which the United States Postal Service has
jurisdiction, by the Postal Service. Such authority of the
Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Homeland
Security, and the Postal Service shall be exercised in
accordance with an agreement which shall be entered into by
the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Homeland
Security, the Postal Service, and the Attorney General.''.

SEC. _04. ASSETS OF PERSONS COMMITTING TERRORIST ACTS AGAINST
FOREIGN COUNTRIES OR INTERNATIONAL
ORGANIZATIONS.

Section 981(a)(1)(G) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (ii);
(2) by striking the period at the end of clause (iii) and
inserting ``; or''; and
(3) by inserting the following after clause (iii):
``(iv) of any individual, entity, or organization engaged
in planning or perpetrating any act of international
terrorism (as defined in section 2331) against any
international organization (as defined in section 209 of the
State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C.
4309(b)) or against any foreign Government. Where the
property sought for forfeiture is located beyond the
territorial boundaries of the United States, an act in
furtherance of such planning or perpetration must have
occurred within the jurisdiction of the United States.''.

SEC. _05. MONEY LAUNDERING THROUGH HAWALAS.

Section 1956 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(j) (1) For the purposes of subsections (a)(1) and
(a)(2), a transaction, transportation, transmission, or
transfer of funds shall be considered to be one involving the
proceeds of specified unlawful activity, if the transaction,
transportation, transmission, or transfer is part of a set of
parallel or dependent transactions, any one of which involves
the proceeds of specified unlawful activity.
``(2) As used in this section, a `dependent transaction' is
one that completes or complements another transaction or one
that would not have occurred but for another transaction.''.

SEC. _06. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS RELATING TO THE
USA PATRIOT ACT.

(a) Technical Corrections.--
(1) Section 322 of Public Law 107-56 is amended by striking
``title 18'' and inserting ``title 28''.
(2) Section 5332(a)(1) of title 31, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``article of luggage'' and inserting
``article of luggage or mail''.
(3) Section 1956(b)(3) and (4) of title 18, United States
Code, are amended by striking ``described in paragraph (2)''
each time it appears; and
(4) Section 981(k) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``foreign bank'' each time it appears and
inserting ``foreign bank or financial institution''.
(b) Codification of Section 316 of the USA PATRIOT Act.--
(1) Chapter 46 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended--
(A) by inserting at the end the following:

``Sec. 987. Anti-terrorist forfeiture protection

``(a) Right to Contest.--An owner of property that is
confiscated under this chapter or any other provision of law
relating to the confiscation of assets of suspected
international terrorists, may contest that confiscation by
filing a claim in the manner set forth in the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure (Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty
and Maritime Claims), and asserting as an affirmative defense
that--
``(1) the property is not subject to confiscation under
such provision of law; or
``(2) the innocent owner provisions of section 983(d) apply
to the case.
``(b) Evidence.--In considering a claim filed under this
section, a court may admit evidence that is otherwise
inadmissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence, if the
court determines that the evidence is reliable, and that
compliance with the Federal Rules of Evidence may jeopardize
the national security interests of the United States.
``(c) Clarifications.--
``(1) Protection of rights.--The exclusion of certain
provisions of Federal law from the definition of the term
`civil forfeiture statute' in section 983(i) shall not be
construed to deny an owner of property the right to contest
the confiscation of assets of suspected international
terrorists under--
``(A) subsection (a) of this section;
``(B) the Constitution; or
``(C) subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5, United States
Code (commonly known as the `Administrative Procedure Act').
``(2) Savings clause.--Nothing in this section shall limit
or otherwise affect any other remedies that may be available
to an owner of property under section 983 or any other
provision of law.''; and
(B) in the chapter analysis, by inserting at the end the
following:
``987. Anti-terrorist forfeiture protection.''.

(2) Subsections (a), (b), and (c) of section 316 of Public
Law 107-56 are repealed.
(c) Conforming Amendments Concerning Conspiracies.--
(1) Section 33(a) of title 18, United States Code is
amended by inserting ``or conspires'' before ``to do any of
the aforesaid acts''.
(2) Section 1366(a) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended--
(A) by striking ``attempts'' each time it appears and
inserting ``attempts or conspires''; and
(B) by inserting ``, or if the object of the conspiracy had
been achieved,'' after ``the attempted offense had been
completed''.

SEC. _07. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO FINANCING OF TERRORISM
STATUTE.

Section 2332b(g)(5)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by inserting ``)'' after ``2339C (relating to
financing of terrorism''.

SEC. _08. CROSS REFERENCE CORRECTION.

Section 5318(n)(4)(A) of title 31, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``National Intelligence Reform Act of
2004'' and inserting ``Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004''.

SEC. _09. AMENDMENT TO AMENDATORY LANGUAGE.

Section 6604 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004 is amended [,effective on the date of
the enactment of that Act]--
(1) by striking ``Section 2339c(c)(2)'' and inserting
``Section 2339C(c)(2)''; and
(2) by striking ``Section 2339c(e)'' and inserting
``Section 2339C(e)''.

SEC. _10. DESIGNATION OF ADDITIONAL MONEY LAUNDERING
PREDICATE.

Section 1956(c)(7)(D) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by inserting ``, or section 2339D (relating to
receiving military-type training from a foreign terrorist
organization)'' after ``section 2339A or 2339B (relating to
providing material support to terrorists)''; and
(2) by striking ``or'' before ``section 2339A or 2339B''.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 369, the
gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart) and the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Scott) each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart).
Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

[[Page H6289]]

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. Money is a key
element of terrorist organizations. If we are to prevent future attacks
and continue to dismantle terrorist organizations, we must cut off
their access to funding.
In order to thwart terrorists financing, President Bush in September
of 2001 signed an executive order freezing the assets of terrorist
organizations and their supporters and authorizing the Secretaries of
Treasury and State to identify, designate, and freeze the U.S.-based
assets that financially facilitate terrorism.
Since then, an unprecedented international effort to freeze terrorism
financing has ensued. This has truly been an international effort with
173 nations implementing orders to freeze terrorist assets with more
than 100 countries passing new legislation to fight terrorism
financing, and 84 countries establishing the Financial Intelligence
United to share information helping to combat terrorism.
Terrorist organizations need money, not just to carry out attacks.
They especially need funding to continue their operations such as
recruiting and training new terrorists and simply supporting their
current organizations. One of the most important lessons we have
learned is exactly how terrorists and other criminal organizations
transmit money through unregulated financial markets.
Like the patchwork of terrorist organizations themselves, terrorism
funding does not come from a single source. Terrorism networks are
funded through rogue state sponsorship, corrupt charities, and
illegitimate businesses fronting as legitimate businesses and using
that money for terrorism, also through exploitation of our legitimate
markets and financial networks.
Many terrorist organizations use a network known as hawalas to
exchange money and finance terrorist activities. These hawalas are an
informal exchange in which payments are delivered without money
actually being moved. In addition, terrorists engage in criminal
activities such as extortion, smuggling and trafficking, credit card
and identity fraud, and the narcotics trade to fund their murderous
activities.
After September 11, our Federal Government acted aggressively through
domestic and international efforts to halt such activities to prevent
terrorism financing. Unfortunately, we have learned that these are not
enough. My amendment would address some of the loopholes.
One, we increase the penalty for terrorism financing. Under current
law, violations only carry a $10,000 fine and a 10-year sentence. My
amendment would increase the fine to $50,000 and the sentence to 20
years.
We also update money laundering statutes. They must keep pace to help
prevent financing of terrorist activities. As Chancellor Gordon Brown
stated last week, prevention of money laundering is the key element of
stopping the financing of terrorist groups of the type suspected of
planning and carrying out the London bombings.
First, my amendment will add a predicate offense to the money-
laundering statutes, such as operating illegal money laundering and
transmitting businesses, misuse of Social Security numbers, military-
style training of individuals, and a new terrorism financing offense.
My amendment also clarifies the law so that a combination of
transactions or parallel transactions can trigger money-laundering
statutes.
Mr. Chairman, our PATRIOT Act added a new forfeiture provision for
individuals planning or perpetrating the act of terrorism against the
United States. My amendment adds a parallel provision for individuals
planning or perpetrating an act of terrorism against a foreign state or
an international organization acting within the jurisdiction of the
United States. This amendment builds on our current laws to address
some of the shortfalls in our laws that we have learned about from our
law enforcement since 9/11. I encourage my colleagues to support this
amendment.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. HART. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment
and thank the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart) for yielding to
me and for introducing this amendment.
Let me say that this amendment makes important improvements in the
financial provisions of the PATRIOT Act with regard to those who try to
prevent terrorists from financing their operations. First of all, I
think that trying to disrupt the terrorism operation is a legitimate
issue to add to the list of predicate offenses covered under the RICO
statute.
I am particularly pleased that there are some changes in the law to
attempt to get at the informal money-changing operation called hawalas
when those hawalas are used to finance terrorist organizations, and
more and more money seems to be transferred through the hawalas system;
and I am awfully afraid that that is not being done for legitimate
purposes, but for the fact that the regular banking operations are
under increasing scrutiny when money transfers take place.
So I would strongly support the gentlewoman's amendment, and I would
urge the Committee to adopt it. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to
me.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment emphasizes a point that we are trying to
do this on the floor without a mark-up, and it may have many unintended
consequences. Despite the name of the title, the title of the amendment
is ``Combating Terrorism Financing Act of 2005,'' but if you read the
provisions, it is not limited to terrorism financing but for all
violations of economic sanctions imposed under the International
Emergency Economic Powers Act. I mean, a senior citizen who has
traveled to Cuba on a bicycle excursion or a clergy attempting to send
humanitarian services or supplies to Cuba could get caught up in this.
It talks about misuse of Social Security numbers so if somebody
misuses a Social Security number to get a job, having nothing to do
with terrorism, just is cheating to get a job, they could get caught up
in this. It raises questions about sending money to your relatives back
home. All of this is implicated in this amendment. It obviously covers
terrorism, but we do not know what else it covers. People who get
caught up in this are looking at 20-year sentences.
Money-laundering statutes are already very broadly written, and this
just broadens it even further. I would hope we would defeat the
amendment so we could have some time to make sure it could be limited
to terrorism financing and just not every violation of the
International Emergency Economic Powers Act and other kinds of money-
laundering statutes.
We also have had not an opportunity to hear from people that may be
involved in this, organizations helping immigrant populations, banks or
other agencies that may have an interest in this who we just have not
had time to hear from to know what their reaction would be. So I would
hope that we would defeat the amendment so we could have more time to
consider it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Zoe Lofgren).
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, having just seen this
amendment for the first time today, there are questions that are
raised. I understand what the intent is, and perhaps if this passes we
can clarify this in a conference committee; but I wonder about the
liabilities of the banking industry that acts innocently to help
immigrants transmit funds home.
The banks in California have been encouraged to regularize the
remittance program. We talk sometimes about illegal immigration, and
that is not anything that any of us approve of; but it is not the same
as terrorism, and it is also not the same as those immigrants. It is
also a financial services industry.
I do wish we could have heard from the financial services industry on
this point because certainly it deserves some clarification. Maybe it
does not do what has been suggested. We have had some communications
from those who are concerned it does. But I do want to raise that on
behalf of the California banking industry that has really stepped up to
avoid the fraud and crime that has occurred with remittances before
they did.

[[Page H6290]]

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart).
Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
Just to answer a couple of points: what we do in the amendment is to
help to provide opportunities for a series of predicate offenses. So
what you get is an opportunity to follow through a number of
transactions to show that there is money laundering. And we have added
a couple of new offenses, but there can be a mixture of some legal and
illegal transactions to do that.
So if the concern is that a grandmother transmitting money to her
family or the other way around, it is not going to trigger a problem
under this amendment. It is very clear that there would have to be a
series of transactions that are suspect in order for this law to be
triggered; and, obviously, there has to be some suspicion of financing
terrorism before law enforcement would move forward with that kind of
prosecution.

{time} 1915

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Zoe Lofgren).
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, here is my question.
Section 208 of the Social Security Act apparently states it is illegal
to use a false Social Security number for activities to obtain
employment.
If I am a 14-year-old kid and I go out and make up a Social Security
number so I can get a job and pretend I am 18, and I get money for it,
have I violated section 208? And if so, if I deal with a bank, is the
bank falling afoul of this terrorism statute?
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume to note that these are the kinds of questions which cause
me to hope we would defeat the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from
Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart).
Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time, and I just want to thank the chairman of the Committee on the
Judiciary, who supports the amendment, and also the chairman of the
Committee on Financial Services, who certainly would have been
concerned if the concern of the gentlewoman from California were a
legitimate one regarding our language.
It is very clear that there would have to be a series of
transactions. That series of transactions would have to lead law
enforcement to believe that there is a financing of terrorism.
Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment.
Combating terror finance is a nebulous, often difficult aspect of our
fight against terrorism. But strength in this area is critical to our
overall success in detecting, tracking and stopping terrorist activity.
We've made remarkable progress in this area in the last 4 years in
developing and sharpening our tools for combating terror finance. But
we still have more work to do.
That's why I created with a number of my colleagues the bipartisan
Congressional Anti-Terrorist Financing Task Force, to bring focus on
the multitude of policies, agencies and jurisdictions which have a
bearing on our effort to combat terror finance.
Like the task force, this amendment offered by my colleague from
Pennsylvania is representative of the continuing need for improvement.
It strengthens our ability to detect and disrupt the financial
lifelines upon which terrorists rely. It sets out severe penalties for
terror financiers and clarifies the authority of law enforcement to
investigate and prosecute illicit financial transactions.
Importantly, this measure acknowledges the vulnerability of informal
value transfer systems such as hawalas to terrorist finance and money
laundering.
This amendment helps the fight against terrorist finance. I encourage
my colleagues to support the amendment and the underlying bill.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
ayes appeared to have it.
Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from
Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart) will be postponed.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15 printed in House
Report 109-178.

Amendment No. 15 Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 15 offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas:
Add at the end the following:

SEC. 17. FORFEITURE.

Section 981(a)(1)(G) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(iv) notwithstanding any other provision of law, shall be
subject to execution or attachment in aid of execution in
order to satisfy such judgment to the extent of any
compensatory damages for which such terrorist organization
has been adjudged liable.''.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 369, the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume and would just note that I am attempting to bring it up at
this time and discuss it, at the same time I am looking to work with my
chairman, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), so that we
can move this forward.
I might also add that the amendment is now Jackson-Lee-Poe.

Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, parliamentary inquiry.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his inquiry.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Could the chairman explain which amendment is
being considered at this point?
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Amendment No. 15.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Could the Reading Clerk read the amendment?
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is the gentlewoman from Texas going to ask
unanimous consent to modify the amendment?
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Yes, I am, Mr. Chairman.

Modification to Amendment No. 15 Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that
the amendment to be brought up be as modified.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the modification.
The Clerk read as follows:

Modification to amendment No. 15 offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee
of Texas:
In lieu of the matter proposed by the amendment, add at the
end of the bill the following:

SEC. __. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

It is a sense of Congress that under title 18 section 981,
that victims of terrorists attacks should have access to the
assets forfeited.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the modification offered
by the gentlewoman from Texas?
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Reserving the right to object, let me say that I
will not object, because I think this modification is a significant
improvement to the original amendment.
I realize that this amendment must be further honed, and I pledge to
the gentlewoman from Texas my cooperation to attempt to do that in
conference.
Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the modification offered
by the gentlewoman from Texas?
There was no objection.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume; and, as I indicated, this amendment is offered by myself
and my colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe). I thank the
distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin for his cooperation in working
to have this amendment be included in the final legislation as it is a
sense of Congress amendment that I think makes a very important
statement.
The proposal relates to the civil forfeiture provision of 18 U.S.C.
981, and would add a section that would allow civil plaintiffs to
attach judgments to collect compensatory damages for which a terrorist
organization has been

[[Page H6291]]

adjudged liable and from the pool of assets that have been forfeited
under section 981.
This is distinctive, Mr. Chairman, because this pertains to
circumstances of terrorism but not necessarily in circumstances when we
are at war.
My amendment seeks to allow victims of terrorism who obtain civil
judgments for damages caused in connection with the acts to attach
foreign or domestic assets held by the United States Government under
18 U.S.C. Section 981(G) calls for the forfeiture of all assets,
foreign or domestic, of any individual entity or organization that is
engaged in planning or perpetrating any act of domestic or
international terrorism.
As we look at H.R. 3199, the PATRIOT Act, it misses the opportunity
to in fact allow victims to satisfy judgments. That is the key. For
example, the Sobero case, where the gentleman from Riverside,
California, was beheaded by Abu Sayyaf, leaving his children
fatherless. The administration responded to this incident by sending a
thousand Special Forces officers to track down the perpetrators, yet
the family of this decreased could not claim any compensation for the
tragedy that occurred.
The same thing occurred with the Iran hostages, which many of us are
familiar with, but are my colleagues aware of the situation with our
American servicemen who were harmed in the Libyan-sponsored bombing of
the La Belle disco in Germany? They were obstructed from being able to
enforce judgments that they received against the terrorist-sponsored
attack and the attack that was sponsored by Libya.
In addition, a group of American prisoners tortured in Iraq during
the Persian Gulf War were barred from collecting their judgment from
the Iraqi government.
I do believe in conference we will have the opportunity to vet this
and to work with all the parties concerned to finally bring some relief
on this issue. Many Members have attempted to bring about relief in
special claims for their particular individual constituents in their
particular jurisdictions. Fortunately, in the opportunity we have
today, by including this sense of Congress in the PATRIOT Act we will
finally get both our debate and we will get action.
Mr. Chairman, I bring attention as well to the World Trade Center
bombing victims who were barred from obtaining judgments against the
Iraqi government. In their claim against the Iraqi Government, the
victims were awarded $64 million against Iraq in connection with the
September 20, 2001, attack. However, they were rebuffed in their
efforts to attach the vested Iraqi assets. While the judgment rendered
was sound, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower
court's finding that the Iraqi assets, now transferred to the U.S.
Treasury, were protected by U.S. sovereign immunity and were
unavailable for judicial attachment.
One major problem that frustrates the objective of my amendment is
the fact that information is not publicly available regarding the
amount and or kind of civil forfeitures made to date. So this amendment
will allow the full discussion by a sense of Congress of what would be
the right process to proceed, balancing the needs of the government,
balancing the needs of the victims of terrorism, balancing the question
of justice, and, yes, balancing the responsible actions under the
PATRIOT Act, protecting us against terrorism but then, when we are
victims of terrorism, to give us the opportunity for relief.
I would hope my colleagues would support this amendment so we can
carry this forward into conference and be able to provide the kind of
leadership necessary for the throngs of victims, those who have already
suffered, and we hope not, but for those who may suffer in the future.
I would say that absent this public disclosure of this very
substantial information; that is; about the assets, it is very
difficult for compensation even to be requested. So I think that we
will have an opportunity to address these concerns, balance the needs
of the government in its need to protect certain information, and give
relief to many Americans.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
desk that has been made in order by the Committee on Rules, Jackson-Lee
No. 42. This proposal relates to the civil forfeiture provision of 18
U.S.C. 981 and would add a section that would allow civil plaintiffs to
attach judgments to collect compensory damages for which a terrorist
organization has been adjudged liable and from the pool of assets that
have been forfeited under Section 981.
My amendment seeks to allow victims of terrorism who obtain civil
judgment for damages caused in connection with the acts to attach
foreign or domestic assets held by the United States Government under
18 U.S.C. 981(G). Section 981(G) calls for the forfeiture of all
assets, foreign or domestic, of any individual, entity, or organization
that has engaged in planning or perpetrating any act of domestic or
international terrorism against the United States, citizens or
residents of the United States.
The legislation, H.R. 3199, as drafted, fails to deal with the
current limitation on the ability to enforce civil judgments by victims
and family members of victims of terrorist offenses. There are several
examples of how the current Administration has sought to bar victims
from satisfying judgments obtained against the government of Iran, for
example.
In the Sobero case, a U.S. national, Guillermo Sobero of Riverside
County, CA, was beheaded by Abu Sayyaf, an Al-Qaeda affiliate, leaving
his children fatherless. The Administration responded to this incident
by sending 1,000 Special Forces officers to track down the
perpetrators, and the eldest child of the victim was invited to the
State of the Union Address. Abu Sayyaf's funds have been seized and are
held by the U.S. Treasury at this time. The family of the victim should
have access to those funds, at the very least, at the President's
discretion.
Similarly, the Administration barred the Iran hostages that were held
from 1979-1981 from satisfying their judgment against Iran. In 2000,
the party filed a suit against Iran under the terrorist State exception
to the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act. While a federal district court
held Iran to be liable, the U.S. government intervened and argued that
the case should be dismissed because Iran had not been designated a
terrorist state at the time of the hostage incident and because of the
Algiers Accords--that led to the release of the hostages, which
required the U.S. to bar the adjudication of suits arising from that
incident. As a result, those hostages received no compensation for
their suffering.
Similarly, American servicemen who were harmed in a Libyan sponsored
bombing of the La Belle disco in Germany were obstructed from obtaining
justice for the terrorist acts they suffered. While victims of the
attack pursued settlement of their claims against the Libyan
government, the Administration lifted sanctions against Libya without
requiring as a condition the determination of all claims of American
victims of terrorism. As a result of this action, Libya abandoned all
talks with the claimants. Furthermore, because Libya was no longer
considered a state sponsor of terrorism, the American servicemen and
women and their families were left without recourse to obtain justice.
The La Belle victims received no compensation for their suffering.
In addition, a group of American prisoners who were tortured in Iraq
during the Persian Gulf War were barred from collecting their judgment
from the Iraqi government. Although the 17 veterans won their case in
the District Court of the District of Columbia, the Administration
argued that the Iraqi assets should remain frozen in a U.S. bank
account to aid in the reconstruction of Iraq. Claiming that the
judgment should be overturned, the Administration deemed that the
Reconstruction effort was more important than recompensing the
suffering of fighter pilots who, during their 12 year imprisonment,
suffered beatings, burns, and threats of dismemberment.
Finally, the World Trade Center bombing victims were barred from
obtaining judgment against the Iraqi government. In their claim against
the Iraqi government, the victims were awarded $64 million against Iraq
in connection with the September 2001 attacks. However, they were
rebuffed in their efforts to attach the vested Iraqi assets. While the
judgment rendered was sound, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals
affirmed the lower court's finding that the Iraqi assets, now
transferred to the U.S. Treasury, were protected by U.S. sovereign
immunity and were unavailable for judicial attachment.
One major problem that frustrates the objective of my amendment is
the fact that information is not publicly available regarding the
amount and/or kind of civil forfeitures made to date. The Executive
Branch of our Government has suggested that it has no duty to disclose
either the identity of the parties who own civilly forfeited property
or the amounts forfeited to date. Absent public disclosure of this very
substantive information, it is very difficult for compensation to even
be requested--let alone expected for victims of horrific acts of
terrorism.

[[Page H6292]]

Right now, H.R. 3199 is the most appropriate and timely vehicle in
which to address this issue and allow U.S. victims of terrorism to
obtain justice from terrorist-supporting or terrorist-housing nations.
The Jackson-Lee Amendment protects terror victims' rights.
Domestic and international terrorism should not be facilitated by
barring successful plaintiff-victims from enforcing valid judgments.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, let me thank the chairman of the full
committee and the ranking member and the ranking member of the
subcommittee for their leadership on this whole entire issue of
protecting Americans against terrorism and including in that protection
of their civil liberties.
This amendment will not only protect Americans against the dangers of
life and limb and the loss of life, but give them relief in our courts.
I ask my colleagues to support this amendment sponsored by myself and
my colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe), a sense of Congress
amendment to provide relief to Americans victimized by terrorism.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), as modified.
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
ayes appeared to have it.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms.
Jackson-Lee), as modified, will be postponed.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 16 printed in House
Report 109-178.

Amendment No. 16 Offered by Mr. Hyde

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 16 offered by Mr. Hyde:
Add at the end the following:

SEC. __. PROHIBITION OF NARCO-TERRORISM.

Part A of the Controlled Substance Import and Export Act
(21 U.S.C. 951 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section
1010 the following:

``Narco-terrorists who aid and support terrorists or foreign terrorist
organizations

``Sec. 1010A. (a) Prohibited Acts.--Whoever, in a
circumstance described in subsection (c), manufactures,
distributes, imports, exports, or possesses with intent to
distribute or manufacture a controlled substance,
flunitrazepam, or listed chemical, or attempts or conspires
to do so, knowing or intending that such activity, directly
or indirectly, aids or provides support, resources, or
anything of pecuniary value to--
``(1) a foreign terrorist organization; or
``(2) any person or group involved in the planning,
preparation for, or carrying out of, a terrorist offense,
shall be punished as provided under subsection (b).
``(b) Penalties.--Whoever violates subsection (a) shall be
fined under this title, imprisoned for not less than 20 years
and not more than life and shall be sentenced to a term of
supervised release of not less than 5 years.
``(c) Jurisdiction.--There is jurisdiction over an offense
under this section if--
``(1) the prohibited drug activity or the terrorist offense
is in violation of the criminal laws of the United States;
``(2) the offense or the prohibited drug activity occurs in
or affects interstate or foreign commerce;
``(3) the offense, the prohibited drug activity or the
terrorist offense involves the use of the mails or a facility
of interstate or foreign commerce;
``(4) the terrorist offense occurs in or affects interstate
or foreign commerce or would have occurred in or affected
interstate or foreign commerce had it been consummated;
``(5) an offender provides anything of pecuniary value to a
foreign terrorist organization;
``(6) an offender provides anything of pecuniary value for
a terrorist offense that is designed to influence the policy
or affect the conduct of the United States government;
``(7) an offender provides anything of pecuniary value for
a terrorist offense that occurs in part within the United
States and is designed to influence the policy or affect the
conduct of a foreign government;
``(8) an offender provides anything of pecuniary value for
a terrorist offense that causes or is designed to cause death
or serious bodily injury to a national of the United States
while that national is outside the United States, or
substantial damage to the property of a legal entity
organized under the laws of the United States (including any
of its States, districts, commonwealths, territories, or
possessions) while that property is outside of the United
States;
``(9) the offense occurs in whole or in part within the
United States, and an offender provides anything of pecuniary
value for a terrorist offense that is designed to influence
the policy or affect the conduct of a foreign government;
``(10) the offense or the prohibited drug activity occurs
in whole or in part outside of the United States (including
on the high seas), and a perpetrator of the offense or the
prohibited drug activity is a national of the United States
or a legal entity organized under the laws of the United
States (including any of its States, districts,
commonwealths, territories, or possessions); or
``(11) after the conduct required for the offense occurs an
offender is brought into or found in the United States, even
if the conduct required for the offense occurs outside the
United States.
``(d) Proof Requirements.--The prosecution shall not be
required to prove that any defendant knew that an
organization was designated as a `foreign terrorist
organization' under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
``(e) Definitions.--In this section, the following
definitions shall apply:
``(1) Anything of pecuniary value.--The term `anything of
pecuniary value' has the meaning given the term in section
1958(b)(1) of title 18, United States Code.
``(2) Terrorist offense.--The term `terrorist offense'
means--
``(A) an act which constitutes an offense within the scope
of a treaty, as defined under section 2339C(e)(7) of title
18, United States Code, which has been implemented by the
United States;
``(B) any other act intended to cause death or serious
bodily injury to a civilian, or to any other person not
taking an active part in the hostilities in a situation of
armed conflict, when the purpose of such act, by its nature
or context, is to intimidate a population, or to compel a
government or an international organization to do or to
abstain from doing any act.
``(3) Terrorist organization.--The term `terrorist
organization' has the meaning given the term in section
212(a)(3)(B)(vi) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(B)(vi)).''.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 369, the gentleman
from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott)
each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde).
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes, and I am very
pleased to offer an amendment to the USA PATRIOT Reauthorization Act
which deals with the new reality of overlapping links between illicit
narcotics and global terrorism. Evidence of this deadly and emerging
symbiotic relationship is overwhelming. My amendment creates a new
crime that will address and punish those who would use these illicit
narcotics to promote and support terrorism.
The Committee on International Relations recently held a hearing on
Afghanistan in which our well-informed Drug Enforcement Administration
conservatively estimated that nearly half of the formerly designated
foreign terrorist organizations have links to illicit narcotics. It has
been widely reported that the Madrid train terrorist bombings were
partially financed by hashish money.
In Colombia, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia and the AUC,
which are two of these FTOs, thrive on the drug trade, supporting and
sustaining themselves with illicit proceeds. My amendment, recognizing
this new and deadly reality, makes it a Federal crime under the
Controlled Substance Import and Export Act to engage in drug
trafficking that directly or indirectly aids or provides support,
resources, or any pecuniary value to a foreign terrorist organization
or any person or group planning, preparing for, or carrying out a
terrorist offense. The amendment provides very tough penalties,
consistent with the serious nature of this crime.
As provided in my amendment, it will no longer be necessary for our
overworked DEA and other law enforcement agencies abroad to be looking
for a U.S. nexus to illicit drug shipments and drug traffickers who are
engaging in this deadly trade which supports global terrorism.
Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of my amendment which will give the
tools to our law enforcement personnel in their ongoing global fight
against terrorism.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Committee will rise informally.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Souder) assumed the chair.

____________________