[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 85 (Tuesday, June 9, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H6325-H6329]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       WITNESS SECURITY AND PROTECTION GRANT PROGRAM ACT OF 2009

  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
pass the bill (H.R. 1741) to require the Attorney General to make 
competitive grants to eligible State, tribal, and local prosecutors to 
establish and maintain certain protection and witness assistance 
programs, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 1741

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Witness Security and 
     Protection Grant Program Act of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF WITNESS PROTECTION GRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Attorney General shall make 
     competitive grants to eligible State, tribal, and local 
     governments to establish or maintain programs that provide 
     protection or assistance to witnesses in court proceedings 
     involving homicide, or involving a serious violent felony or 
     serious drug offense as defined in section 3559(c)(2) of 
     title 18, United States Code. The Attorney General shall 
     ensure that, to the extent reasonable and practical, such 
     grants are made to achieve an equitable geographical 
     distribution of such programs throughout the United States.
       (b) State Defined.--For purposes of this Act, the term 
     ``State'' means any State of the United States, the District 
     of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin 
     Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands.

     SEC. 3. USE OF GRANTS.

       A grant made under section 2 may be used only to pay all or 
     part of the cost of the program for which such grant is made.

     SEC. 4. PRIORITY.

       In making grants under section 2, the Attorney General 
     shall give priority to applications submitted under section 5 
     involving programs in States with an average of not less than 
     100 murders per year during the most recent 5-year period, as 
     calculated using the latest available crime statistics from 
     the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

     SEC. 5. APPLICATION.

       To be eligible for a grant under section 2, a State, 
     tribal, or local government shall submit to the Office of 
     Justice Programs an application in such form and manner, at 
     such time, and accompanied by such information as the 
     Attorney General specifies.

     SEC. 6. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.

       From amounts made available to carry out this Act, the 
     Attorney General, upon request of a recipient of a grant 
     under section 2, shall provide technical assistance to such 
     recipient to the extent the Attorney General determines such 
     technical assistance is needed to establish or maintain a 
     program described in such section.

     SEC. 7. BEST PRACTICES.

       (a) Report.--Each recipient of a grant under section 2 
     shall submit to the Attorney General a report, in such form 
     and manner and containing such information as specified by 
     the Attorney General, that evaluates each program established 
     or maintained pursuant to such grant, including policies and 
     procedures under the program.
       (b) Development of Best Practices.--Based on the reports 
     submitted under subsection (a), the Attorney General shall 
     develop best practice models to assist States and other 
     relevant entities in addressing--
       (1) witness safety;
       (2) short-term and permanent witness relocation;
       (3) financial and housing assistance; and
       (4) any other services related to witness protection or 
     assistance that are determined by the Attorney General to be 
     necessary.
       (c) Dissemination to States.--Not later than 1 year after 
     the development of best practice models under subsection (b), 
     the Attorney General shall disseminate to States and other 
     relevant entities such models.
       (d) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     States and other relevant entities should use the best 
     practice models developed and disseminated in accordance with 
     this Act to evaluate, improve, and develop witness protection 
     or witness assistance as appropriate.
       (e) Clarification.--Nothing in this Act requires the 
     dissemination of any information if the Attorney General 
     determines such information is law enforcement sensitive and 
     should only be disclosed within the law enforcement community 
     or that such information poses a threat to national security.

     SEC. 8. REPORT TO CONGRESS.

       Not later than December 31, 2015, the Attorney General 
     shall submit a report to Congress on the

[[Page H6326]]

     programs funded by grants awarded under section 2, including 
     on matters specified under section 7(b).

     SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     Act $30,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2010 through 
     2014.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Johnson) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.


                             General Leave

  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Georgia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the Witness Security and Protection Act of 2009 
authorizes the Attorney General to award grants to States and local 
prosecutors for establishing and improving short-term witness 
protection programs for witnesses that are involved in a State or local 
trial involving a homicide, a serious violent felony, or a serious drug 
offense.
  Witness intimidation reduces the likelihood that citizens will be 
willing to perform their civic duty in the criminal justice system, 
often depriving police and prosecutors of critical evidence. More 
broadly, it also undermines public confidence that the criminal justice 
system can adequately protect its citizens.
  And there is no better example that demonstrates the need for this 
legislation than the tragedy that befell the Dawson family in the 
autumn of 2002 in Baltimore, Maryland.
  Angela Dawson had repeatedly contacted the police about drug dealing 
in her neighborhood. In retaliation, Darrell Brooks, a neighborhood 
dealer, firebombed the Dawson home not once but twice before killing 
Angela; her husband, Carnell; and all five of their children.
  This heinous violence perpetrated against the Dawson family was the 
impetus for this legislation, and I commend Congressman Cummings for 
his tireless pursuit of this legislation over multiple Congresses. I 
strongly urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1741, the Witness Security and 
Protection Grant Program Act of 2009. Witness testimony is a critical 
component of our criminal justice system. Even with sophisticated DNA 
and other forensic evidence, there is no substitute for an eyewitness 
testimony.
  However, engaging the cooperation of witnesses is frequently a 
daunting obstacle in many criminal prosecutions. Many witnesses fail to 
come forward or refuse to testify out of fear of retribution by the 
defendants or pressure by the community.
  It is no surprise that violent criminals will unleash their brutality 
on witnesses whose testimony could result in years or decades in 
prison. It is also no surprise that violent gangs and drug 
organizations are the source of much of this brutality. The Justice 
Department's National Gang Center reports that ``gang members so 
frequently engage in witness intimidation that it is considered part of 
normal gang behavioral dynamics.'' State and local law enforcement 
officials and prosecutors are in a constant struggle to counteract 
witness intimidation and to convince witnesses to cooperate. It's vital 
that we assist in this.
  At the Federal level, the U.S. Marshals Service is charged with 
witness protection and has operated the Witness Security Program since 
1970. Under the program, more than 7,500 witnesses and over 9,500 
family members have been protected, relocated, or given new identities. 
Most States and local governments cannot offer that level of 
protection. Many cannot afford to offer even basic protection services, 
for instance, during a trial in which the proceedings in a small town 
might be all too evident to gangs in the area.
  H.R. 1741, the Witness Security and Protection Grant Program Act, 
directs the Attorney General to award grants to State and local 
governments to establish and maintain witness protection programs.
  Mr. Speaker, it is very clear that this not only is a well-worthwhile 
program whose time has come, but, in fact, it could be a real cost-
saving to the taxpayers from the Federal level. Federal prosecution 
tends to be more expensive. In the case of gang, drug, and other 
activities, there is almost always a dual nexus: one in which the State 
or local courts can try the gang members, one in which the Federal 
Government can find Federal statutes to try under. Unfortunately, 
without an effective witness protection program, localities may often 
choose to move a case to Federal court where witness protection is 
available rather than providing that protection themselves.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I rise with my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle to support strongly that we find those opportunities in which 
local government can provide this service rather than removing to 
Federal court. This is a cost-saving, commonsense initiative, and I 
support it.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1315

  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, with respect to my great 
colleague from the great State of Maryland, Congressman Cummings, I 
will yield so much time as he may consume.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. I want to thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 
Johnson) for yielding, and I want to certainly thank Chairman Conyers, 
Chairman Scott, Mr. Issa, the entire Judiciary Committee, and the House 
leadership for recognizing the importance of this legislation by 
bringing it to the floor today.
  Mr. Speaker, while our soldiers fight in Iraq and Afghanistan, many 
citizens across our Nation are facing terrorism right here at home, 
right here in their own neighborhoods. People are being murdered in 
broad daylight, and their killers are walking free because we do not 
protect witnesses to crimes from threats against their safety if they 
cooperate with the police, if they testify in court, or even if they 
are listed as witnesses to testify in court.
  This epidemic of witness intimidation is a menace to our civil 
society, and it is a plague on our entire justice system. In fact, it 
was the deaths of Angela and Carnell Dawson and their five children, 
ages 9 to 14, that first motivated me to address this issue. I can 
remember very vividly sitting at a funeral with one adult casket and 
with the caskets of five children. Then, a day later, the husband died, 
and we went to his funeral.
  The entire Dawson family was killed in October 2002 when a gang 
member firebombed their home in the middle of the night in retaliation 
for Mrs. Dawson's repeated complaints to the police about the recurring 
drug trafficking in her east Baltimore neighborhood.
  I might add, Mr. Speaker, that Mrs. Dawson literally lived within 
about a 5-minute drive from my house.
  Angela Dawson and her family were not affiliated in any way with 
drugs or gangs. Rather, Mrs. Dawson was just a civic-minded parent, 
trying to clean up her neighborhood, and trying to make it a safe place 
for her children and for other families.
  While several State and local entities have established witness 
assistance programs, many of these programs have fallen victim to the 
tough economic times and have had to be discontinued. Conversely, the 
U.S. Marshals Service uses $65 million to operate its Federal Witness 
Security Program, and it has an excellent track record. In all of its 
years in existence, they have never been known to have lost a witness, 
and at the same time, the prosecutors in those cases have had an 89 
percent success rate.
  It is because of this inequity that I call upon my colleagues to give 
law enforcement the ability to protect the sanctity of our justice 
system and pass H.R. 1741, the Witness Security and Protection Grant 
Program Act.
  H.R. 1741 would help local law enforcement officers strengthen 
witness assistance and protection units, sending a very loud and clear 
message to

[[Page H6327]]

criminals that our citizens and we in the Congress of the United States 
of America will not be deterred by fear tactics like intimidation.
  Speaking of intimidation, throughout the City of Baltimore, we have a 
group that put out two trailers entitled ``Stop Snitching.'' In one of 
those trailers I, along with the State's attorney, were threatened 
because we were standing up for this legislation and because we were 
standing up for witnesses. I made it very clear to them that I have no 
fear because, if you can have a situation where a person can literally 
be standing on a corner and 20 people know the perpetrator and the 
perpetrator comes up and blows somebody's brains out and nobody 
testifies, what happens then is that we have given the criminal more 
power; we have taken power away from regular citizens. The next thing 
you know, the criminal feels that there are no consequences to his or 
her actions.
  You cannot have a criminal justice system that is effective and 
efficient unless you have the cooperation of witnesses. It is up to 
this Congress to make it very, very clear that we will not, under any 
circumstances, stand for witnesses to be intimidated, harmed, 
threatened, killed or in any way deterred from carrying out their 
duties to assist police and law enforcement.
  The bill would provide $150 million in competitive grants over 5 
years to enable State and local governments to establish witness 
assistance programs with priority given to cities or to locales that 
have had an average of at least 100 homicides per year during the most 
recent 5-year period. H.R. 1741 would also allow these programs to 
receive technical assistance from the United States Marshals Service.
  By improving the protection for State and local witnesses, we come 
one step closer to alleviating the fears and the threats of prospective 
witnesses and to safeguarding our communities from violence.
  Again, I want to thank Mr. Conyers. I want to thank Mr. Johnson, Mr. 
Scott, and the ranking member for their support. I urge my colleagues 
to pass this legislation.
  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to 
the distinguished attorney from the City of New Orleans, the junior 
Member from Louisiana, Mr. Cao.
  Mr. CAO. I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1741, the Witness 
Security and Protection Grant Program Act.
  Crime is the number one concern of my constituents in New Orleans and 
in Jefferson Parishes in Louisiana. Crime is my top concern, too. My 
district includes the City of New Orleans, which, as of June 1, has 
already seen 80 murders. Further, according to the FBI's annual report 
on crime released last week, New Orleans leads the Nation in murders. 
This says nothing about the incidence of other types of crime, from 
sexual offenses to robberies.
  I hold in my hand a photo of Sergeant Manuel Curry. He was a popular 
and much-loved member of the New Orleans Police Department. At 62 years 
of service, he was one of America's longest-serving police officers. 
Tragically, for the NOPD and for New Orleans, he passed away last week, 
and our thoughts and prayers are with his wife, with his family, and 
with his NOPD colleagues.
  Here is an article from today's newspaper. It reports that, within 
hours of Sergeant Curry's death, three people broke into his home and 
stole guns, money, jewelry, and medication. While at the funeral home, 
arranging her husband's burial, his wife was notified of the burglary.
  Our thoughts and prayers also go to the family of this couple, 
Orlander Cassimere, Sr., and his wife of 55 years. Elder Cassimere was 
scheduled to have preached the Mother's Day sermon this year at the 
church in New Orleans' Lower Ninth Ward, where he was pastor; but on 
that day, relatives found him and his wife fatally shot in their home. 
It is thought that their murders are connected to a relative's plan to 
testify in a kidnapping and attempted murder case.
  Reading these articles makes me angry and sick because of the actions 
of these individuals who disgraced the memories of Sergeant Curry and 
of the Cassimeres. They disgrace all of the people of New Orleans and 
of Jefferson Parishes. If these stories don't paint a picture of out-
of-control crime, I don't know what will.
  I continue to meet with law enforcement and with prosecution 
officials in my district, and I am presently working with them to 
leverage Federal resources. They must have all of the resources they 
can get.
  The Witness Security and Protection Grant Program will go a long way 
towards addressing the issue of crime in my district because, without 
adequate protection and assurances, these witnesses will stop coming 
forward, and crime will remain out of control.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for this effort with this 
important bill, and I look forward to working with them on other 
important legislation.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I will yield 3 minutes to my 
fellow Judiciary Committee member, Congressman Pedro Pierluisi.
  Mr. PIERLUISI. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1741, 
and I want to commend Congressman Cummings for his terrific work on 
this bill.
  H.R. 1741 will provide funding to States and to territories so they 
can create or can improve their witness protection programs. Priority 
for funding would be given to those jurisdictions with the highest 
rates of violent crime.
  Violent crime continues to plague many of our communities. Many of 
those crimes were likely observed by one or more bystanders. Whether 
these witnesses choose to come forward or choose to remain in the 
shadows, many of those crimes will depend, in large part, on whether 
they feel safe cooperating with law enforcement. It is, therefore, 
critical to the effective functioning of our criminal justice system 
that government at all levels has the means to provide for witness 
security.
  As Attorney General of Puerto Rico, I have worked with many witnesses 
who have received threats that they or their loved ones would be harmed 
if they testified against a defendant. Not unreasonably, some of these 
witnesses ultimately chose to remain silent. Others elected to plunge 
ahead despite the risks, motivated by a sense of civic duty. The key 
point is this:
  Choosing between providing information that may deliver a criminal to 
justice and protecting one's own safety is a choice that no witness 
should be forced to make.
  Since 1970, the Federal government has operated its own successful 
witness protection program. In light of a 2006 report by the Department 
of Justice that found that witness intimidation was pervasive and 
increasing, the need to support similar programs at the State and 
territorial levels is beyond question. Therefore, I respectfully urge 
my colleagues in this Chamber to support H.R. 1741.
  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, at this time, it is my pleasure to yield 5 
minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleague 
from Georgia for bringing forth and for handling this commonsense bill 
on the floor of the House. I want to thank my colleague from California 
for yielding me time.
  This is an important issue. There are many issues that are remarkably 
important to the American people, and I want to talk about one of them. 
It is the national energy tax.
  As you know, Mr. Speaker, there is a proposal that is moving through 
the House committees right now that will have a remarkable effect on 
the American people. If history holds true, there will be very little 
time on the floor of this House to debate this issue. As the Speaker 
has said, she wants to get it done by July 4.
  So I would suggest that it is important for all of our colleagues to 
be paying attention to the national energy tax and to the consequences 
of it. I would suggest that the American people ought to be paying 
attention as well. Let me point out a couple of the issues on this 
national energy tax.
  By an outside group, by an objective group, the estimates are that it 
will destroy millions of jobs--1.1 million jobs on average each year. 
It will raise electricity rates 90 percent after adjusting for 
inflation. It will increase gasoline prices by 74 percent. It will 
increase residential natural gas prices by 55 percent. It will raise 
the average family's

[[Page H6328]]

annual energy bill by $1,500. That's right, Mr. Speaker, by $1,500. It 
will increase inflation-adjusted Federal debt by 26 percent. So let's 
review.
  This national energy tax, supported by the Speaker, is going to 
decrease jobs, and she is trying to get it through this House by the 
end of this month. It will decrease jobs; it will increase electricity 
rates; it will increase gas prices; it will increase natural gas 
prices; it will increase the family energy bill; and it will increase 
the Federal debt.
  Now, the American people think this is a terrible idea, and they are 
very frustrated with the fact that the commonsense solutions that have 
been put on the table are not being given an opportunity to come to the 
floor.
  What are those commonsense solutions?
  Well, Mr. Speaker, as you know and as the American people know, there 
are good bills out there. One of them is one that I have cosponsored, 
H.R. 2300, coming out of the Republican Study Committee and the Western 
Caucus. It is called the American Energy Innovation Act.

                              {time}  1330

  What it does is provide for increasing production, responsible 
production of American resources. It provides for increasing 
conservation so that we decrease the demand side of the energy curve; 
and it provides for expansion of innovation, incentives for innovation 
so that we unleash the genius of the American people to solve the 
challenges that we have in the area of energy. It doesn't tax the 
American people. It doesn't decrease jobs. It doesn't increase 
electricity prices, as the Democrat plan would do. It doesn't increase 
gas prices, as the Democrats would do. It doesn't increase natural gas 
prices, as the Democrat plan would do. It doesn't increase the family 
energy bill, and it doesn't increase the Federal debt. No, Mr. Speaker, 
it solves the problems in the way that the American people want them 
solved.
  The American Energy Innovation Act would increase production in a 
responsible and environmentally sensitive and sound way. It would 
increase innovation so that we develop a new energy for this 21st 
century, and it would increase conservation, decrease that demand side 
so that we don't continue to support countries overseas that, frankly, 
aren't necessarily our friend.
  I appreciate the opportunity to commend my friend from Georgia for 
his bill. I appreciate my friend from California for offering this 
opportunity to speak to my colleagues and to ask the Speaker if she 
wouldn't allow for full and open debate of appropriate energy bills 
that American people can support, not ones that increase their taxes 
and decrease jobs all across this land.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, nothing can be more important 
than the liberties that we enjoy under our Constitution. This bill that 
we are considering could not be any more important.
  Therefore, in that regard, I wish to yield 5 minutes to my good 
friend from New Jersey, Congressman Pascrell.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, this is truly bizarre. We're talking about 
life-and-death issues--and I know technically you can speak about 
anything. But we're talking about life-and-death issues. We have seen 
witnesses disappear, go underground so that law enforcement cannot 
protect us. Yet the gentleman, my good friend from Georgia, gets up and 
talks about something which has absolutely nothing to do with what 
we're talking about. But I guess that's par for the course.
  So I thank the ranking member. I thank the chairman. I thank Mr. 
Cummings for getting this legislation. And Mr. Cummings has done us all 
a great favor. Nothing is going to help law enforcement more than our 
trying to help with the protection of the witnesses out there who view 
these crimes.
  Criminal street gangs have been a major concern all across this 
country and in New Jersey; and truly, law enforcement cannot do its job 
without this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I don't believe that there is a 
more significant thing that we can do in reversing the losing battle 
that we face at this point and attacking street crime and ending 
modern-day organized crime on the streets. You need viable witnesses 
who are not left to chance and risk and will not be frightened or 
intimidated.
  In a 2007 survey conducted in New Jersey by the State police, 
respondents in 4 out of every 10 New Jersey municipalities--that's 43 
percent--reported the presence of street gangs in their jurisdiction 
during the previous 12 months, not only in cities but in suburban 
communities. As a former mayor, I know how tough it is for our cities 
and communities to deal with gang problems all across the United States 
of America. Gang members are involved in violent and drug-related 
crimes and recruit young folks in our public schools. Catching and 
punishing the perpetrators of these crimes is oftentimes difficult, if 
not impossible. Gangs are so pervasive in many communities that the 
threat of violent reprisal against members of a community or gang 
members who want to leave severely hinders law enforcement 
investigations.
  H.R. 1741 would provide a crucial missing link that prevents many of 
these crimes from being solved in the first place. This legislation 
will allow the Justice Department to begin offering grants to local 
communities to implement local witness protection programs. What have 
we come to? When we talk about witness protection programs, we think 
we're talking about something 20 years ago, 40 years ago. We're talking 
about now. We're talking about in our own neighborhoods. We're talking 
about in our own families. That's what we're talking about. Ensuring 
witness safety, short- and long-term relocation, and financial and 
housing assistance are essential to the effective investigation and 
prosecution of gang-related crimes, Mr. Speaker. The Federal Government 
must reach out to assist local police departments in keeping our 
communities and our schools safe. This bill will provide a critical 
service to many needy communities. I thank those folks who brought it 
to the floor, particularly Mr. Cummings, my good friend from Maryland. 
I'm glad we could stay, most of us, on the topic at hand.
  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, we believe that the precious time on the floor 
needs to be well spent, and we certainly support that we are well 
spending it. This is an important piece of legislation. It's important 
because, in fact, we in the Federal Government need to team with cities 
and localities around the country to ensure that we not distort where 
prosecutions are made. I fully support this legislation because, with 
all due respect to my colleague, it will relieve the cities and the 
counties from often choosing a Federal venue rather than a local venue 
if we help with protecting their witnesses, something that the Federal 
Government and the U.S. Marshals have proven to do very well. So I do 
support the bill. It's a bipartisan bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I would ask how many minutes are 
left.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. There are 6 minutes remaining for the 
gentleman from Georgia. The gentleman from California has 9 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
  I now yield 4 minutes to the gentlelady from Houston, Texas, and also 
a fellow member of the Judiciary Committee, Ms. Jackson-Lee.
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished member of the 
Judiciary Committee and chairperson of the subcommittee for yielding.
  I rise in support of H.R. 1741, which is long in coming and long 
overdue. Tragically, we are seeing the increased utilization of gun 
violence and certainly the increased impact on our teenagers. Whether 
it is guns used in gang activity or guns used to slaughter innocent 
persons in various stop-and-go shops or others, we are seeing that kind 
of senseless violence. Over the last couple of days, I saw in my own 
community two hardworking shopkeepers murdered and slaughtered in their 
own shop early in the morning; and the kind of killing it was may have 
generated witnesses who need to be protected. We have watched the 
slaughter of children in the Chicago school district, which has gotten 
to be an epidemic condition. They have been using guns. There have been 
young people leaving churches who have been shot and killed. So we 
understand the value

[[Page H6329]]

of this legislation. I remember hearing before the Judiciary Committee 
where the individuals who wanted this kind of protection told us of the 
fear in which they live.
  H.R. 1741, sponsored by my good friend, Representative Elijah 
Cummings, is an important legislative initiative; and I would ask my 
colleagues to, likewise, support it. It joins right together with H. 
Res. 454 that will be on this House floor in a few minutes that deals 
with the 25th anniversary of the National Center For Missing and 
Exploited Children and has a lot to do with the protection of our 
Nation's children, those who have been kidnapped and murdered, and 
those who have been exploited. Again, it ties back to this whole 
question of protecting witnesses who provide the necessary testimony to 
convict those of these heinous crimes.
  This may not be the underlying necessity for H. Res. 515; but I rise 
to also add my support for the legislation that condemns the slaughter 
and murder of Army Private William Long and the wounding of Army 
Private Quinton Ezeagwula. That was a terrorist act of which we 
condemn. It may be that the alleged perpetrator is in prison, but we 
don't know whether there is a widespread conspiracy. We hear so. Again, 
H.R. 1741 would allow us to protect these witnesses. The act of killing 
our military personnel on U.S. soil was an act of terror, and I abhor 
it. I denounce it. It is a resounding disgrace in this country; and 
therefore, H. Res. 515 should, in fact, be able to pass. All of these 
tie to the idea of protecting witnesses in criminal activities because 
we realize how frightening a prospect it is.
  I also add my support to H.R. 2675, the extension of the Antitrust 
Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act of 2004. I am also a member 
of the Subcommittee on Antitrust and view this as an important 
legislative initiative.
  Allow me to close by suggesting that as we saw in my remarks earlier 
today on the floor in H. Res. 505, condemning the death of Dr. George 
Tiller, we have conditions here that warrant this legislation, H.R. 
1741. It is terrible that violent acts are perpetrated here in America, 
that violent acts come about through the use of firearms and other 
manners and, therefore, there will be witnesses that will be necessary 
to bring these people to justice. I cannot imagine allowing these 
heinous crimes to be perpetrated without being able to prosecute 
because a witness is frightened for themselves and their family. The 
legislation that we are now speaking to provides that protection, and I 
ask my colleagues to support the legislation.
  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would yield back the balance of 
my time and support the passage of this important legislation.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. The great Constitution of the United States 
of America starts off with a preamble, and that preamble goes as 
follows:
  We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect 
Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the 
common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings 
of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this 
Constitution for the United States of America.
  So this bill deals with domestic tranquility; and as you know, Mr. 
Speaker, the most powerful beast imagined can always be brought down by 
just a little parasite inside of that particular beast. We too can be 
subjected to internal parasites, and we can die from that. The question 
is, are we willing to die to ensure that domestic tranquility is 
achieved? If we truly care about ourselves, our own safety and the 
safety of our dear families, neighbors and anyone else, should we not 
be willing to die to protect our liberties by calling it like it is, 
street crime? You see something happen--regardless of whether or not 
you consider that snitching or not, and I would say that it's not. But 
do you have the courage to be able to do what will really protect your 
folks? That's the question.

                              {time}  1345

  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 1741, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________