[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 106 (Friday, July 29, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9475-S9476]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Lieberman):
  S. 1558. A bill to amend the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to 
protect family members of filers from disclosing sensitive information 
in a public filing and extend the public filing requirement for 5 
years; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
that would preserve an important means of protecting the safety of 
those who work in the Federal judiciary system.
  This legislation, which I am pleased to sponsor with my distinguished 
colleague, Senator Lieberman, pertains to information on Federal 
financial disclosure forms.
  This legislation would amend the Ethics in Government Act to extend 
for five years the authority to redact financial disclosure statements 
filed by judges, and other officers and employees of the Federal 
judiciary. This redaction occurs after a finding is made by the 
Judicial Conference, in consultation with the United States Marshals 
Service, that revealing personal and sensitive information could 
endanger the filer. In such cases, this legislation would allow 
redactions of information that could put the filer or his or her family 
at risk.
  In 1988, Congress recognized the potential for threats against 
individual judges. As a result, Congress authorized the judicial branch 
to redact, when circumstances require, certain information from 
individual financial disclosure reports before they are released to the 
public. The redaction provision was set to expire at the end of 2001, 
but Congress extended the redaction authority for an additional four 
years. The current authority expires at the end of this year.
  The five-year extension in this legislation will help Congress ensure 
that the Judicial Conference carries out the authority in a manner that 
achieves the appropriate balance between safety measures and public 
disclosure. Given recent incidents of violence against judges and their 
families, the inclusion of threats to the filer's family is necessary 
to provide security and peace of mind.
  The record shows that this redaction authority has been used 
sparingly and wisely. In its report to the Committee on Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs, the Judicial Conference reported 
that, of the 3,942 Federal judiciary employees required to file 
financial disclosure reports in 2004, only 177

[[Page S9476]]

reports were partially redacted before release.
  For 40 judges, the approved redaction requests were based on specific 
threats such as high-threat trials, ongoing protective investigations, 
identify theft, and continuing threats from criminal defendants and 
disgruntled civil litigants. For 137 judges, the approved redaction 
requests were based on general threats and the disclosure of a family 
member's unsecured place of work, the judge's regular presence at an 
unsecured location, or information that would reveal the residence of 
the judge or members of the judge's family.
  In response to a request by our Committee, the Government 
Accountability Office reviewed redaction requests from 1999 through 
2002. GAO found that less than 10 percent of annual judicial filers 
requested any type of redaction.
  In each instance where a report was redacted in its entirety, the 
determination was made that the judge who filed the report was subject 
to a specific, active security threat. Redactions of information 
identifying assets, gifts, reimbursements or creditor listings were 
allowed in only a very limited number of cases, and then only until the 
specifically identified threat ceased. According to the Judicial 
Conference, the most frequent redaction requests now relate to 
information that would reveal where a judge or a member of the judge's 
family can regularly be found.
  A fair and impartial judiciary requires a safe and secure 
environment. This legislation will help ensure the judicial branch has 
procedures in place to protect personal information while ensuring the 
public retains its right to access to the annual disclosure reports. I 
look forward to working with my colleagues on this important 
legislation.
                                 ______