[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 131 (Thursday, September 6, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H10197-H10198]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   SUPPORT H.R. 933, THE WITNESS SECURITY AND PROTECTION ACT OF 2007

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the deeply 
troubling issue of terrorism right here in our own backyard. It is a 
problem that is endangering our children, threatening our families, and 
plaguing our neighborhoods. I am talking about the brazen acts of 
violence, fire bombings and shootings that are preventing the good 
people in our communities from testifying to the crimes that they have 
witnessed. Who can blame them, when they are sitting targets for those 
who have no shame?
  In cities across America, people are murdered in broad daylight and 
their killers are walking free because we cannot adequately address the 
issue of witness intimidation. We have all heard the news reports 
regarding the ``anti-snitching'' campaigns that have appeared in so 
many of our communities, but few of us are aware of what these efforts 
really mean to the people on the ground. But all around us, evidence of 
these campaigns' impact is present. Murder rates are at a record-
breaking high this summer in my hometown of Baltimore City and indeed 
in communities across the country where criminals have persistently 
evaded law enforcement.
  In order to combat this problem, I introduced H.R. 993, the Witness 
Security and Protection Act of 2007. Upon enactment, this legislation 
authorizes $90 million per year over the next 3 years to assist State 
and local law enforcement with witness protection, while fostering 
Federal, State, and local partnerships.
  Priority will be given to prosecuting officers and States with an 
average of at least 100 murders during the immediate past 5 years. 
However, smaller entities will also have a chance to receive funding. 
State and local prosecutors will also be able to use these funds to 
provide witness protection on their own or to pay the costs of 
enrolling their witnesses in the short-term State Witness Protection 
Program to be created within the United States Marshals Service's 
office.
  The U.S. Marshals Service has a wealth of expertise and experience 
that will assist State and local entities in developing more 
comprehensive programs. In over 30 years under the Federal Witness 
Security Program, not a single witness that followed security 
procedures has been harmed while being protected by the program. More 
to the point, cases involving the testimony of these participants have 
an 89 percent conviction rate. In contrast, State witness protection 
programs are severely underfunded and enjoy virtually no Federal 
support.
  While there has been tremendous support for this initiative in 
Congress, the lack of support from the administration has certainly 
been startling. On April 24, 2007, the House Judiciary Committee held a 
hearing on the Witness Security and Protection Act. During that time, 
the Department of Justice official opposed this legislation based on 
the claim that it does not have the capacity or the will to implement a 
grant program. DOJ officials argued that running a grant program 
distracts from its ability to carry out its mission. Since when has 
inconvenience been an excuse for shortchanging justice in America?
  On May 24, 2007, I met with officials from the DOJ and the U.S. 
Marshals Service to discuss my concerns. I left the meeting feeling 
optimistic about a compromise. However, this has not been the case. I 
have even given DOJ staff the opportunity to come up with a 
counterproposal to achieve the same goal as the Witness Security and 
Protection Act of 2007, that is, the goal of strengthening State and 
local witness protection programs without a grant program. 
Unfortunately, DOJ officials have not been able to come up with a 
compromise, or even an alternative, to H.R. 933.
  In light of DOJ's failure to cooperate, it is extremely disappointing 
to learn that it has no problem supporting efforts in other countries, 
while dodging our efforts to set up similar programs in places such as 
Maryland and Washington.
  The U.S. Marshals Service, Mr. Speaker, has been assisting about a 
dozen countries, including Colombia, Israel, Italy, Brazil and 
Thailand, with the creation of witness protection programs in response 
to increasing threats against key figures in foreign prosecutions.
  International demand for the program is so great that Interpol, the 
world's largest law enforcement organization, is hosting a conference 
this month with the Marshals Service at Interpol's headquarters in 
France to address the needs of foreign governments. It is so very 
tragic that we can assist those abroad, but we will not fight terrorism 
right here in our backyards.
  Mr. Speaker, improving protection for State and local witnesses will 
move us one step closer toward alleviating the fears and threats of 
prospective witnesses and help to safeguard our communities from 
violence.

[[Page H10198]]

  I want my constituents in Maryland's Seventh Congressional District 
and the people across this great Nation to know that they are not 
alone. This is a priority issue for me, and I will not stop until this 
issue is addressed. This is why I am calling upon all of my colleagues 
to cosponsor H.R. 933.

                          ____________________