[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 96 (Thursday, June 30, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4295-S4296]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. BROWN of Massachusetts:
  S. 1312. A bill to strengthen and improve monitoring in the fisheries 
across the United States and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. BROWN of Massachusetts. Mr. President, I rise to speak about 
overregulation--something that is really putting a wet blanket on many 
businesses throughout our country, and especially in Massachusetts. 
That is why I am introducing a bill to reform the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration's--or NOAA's--asset forfeiture fund.
  The fund, as you may know, is authorized by the Magnuson-Stevens 
Fishery and Conservation Act and allows NOAA to retain fines and 
penalties collected as a result of enforcement actions for legitimate 
enforcement purposes.
  As the Department of Commerce inspector general's excellent work 
revealed, NOAA has mismanaged that fund for many years, wasting 
taxpayer funds on exorbitant foreign travel and unauthorized purchases 
of vehicles. As a matter of fact, they purchase more vehicles than they 
actually have employees. So that speaks for itself. They also purchased 
a $300,000 luxury boat with the funds collected in that forfeiture 
fund.
  The reason I am standing on the floor of the Senate today is because 
the way the fund has been implemented has actually corrupted the 
relationship between the fishermen and the regulators. Fishermen have 
complained for years about the arbitrary fines, overzealous 
enforcement, and violations of their due process rights when it comes 
to dealing with NOAA. After decades of such complaints, mostly in the 
Northeast, the Department of Commerce appointed a distinguished retired 
judge to serve as a special master and investigate enforcement actions 
and abuses by NOAA.
  In one case, a New Bedford, MA, fisherman lost his livelihood and a 
farm that had been in the family since the 1640s. He was forced to sell 
due to punitive NOAA penalties. Incredibly, the Commerce Department's 
own special master concluded that the perverse incentive to fill the 
asset forfeiture fund with funds was a motivating factor in how NOAA 
handled that case. Larry Yacubian got not only a check but an apology 
from Washington because of those abuses, but he will never get his home 
back.
  That is why in my role as ranking member of the Federal Financial 
Management Subcommittee, I, along with my dear friend, Senator Tom 
Carper of Delaware, held a field hearing in Boston on June 20 to 
identify a lot of these longstanding problems and identify the problems 
with the asset forfeiture fund itself.
  Unfortunately, the hearing revealed that while NOAA has instituted 
some reforms to its management of the asset forfeiture fund, including 
auditing the funds for the first time in nearly four

[[Page S4296]]

decades, it still intends to utilize the seized assets of fishermen to 
pay for foreign travel, which is inappropriate.
  The years of NOAA's mismanagement and abuse of the asset forfeiture 
fund have bred mistrust among fishermen and Federal officials, and it 
can only be broken by removing the fund from NOAA.
  It is for these reasons that today I am introducing the Asset 
Forfeiture Responsibility Act of 2011, which will hopefully end this 
sad chapter in Federal financial management by this agency by replacing 
the existing funds with a new fisheries investment fund. Funds will be 
kept--like most every other fund--at the Treasury Department for the 
benefit of regional councils and NOAA, and the fund will be audited for 
the next 3 years to make sure they are getting their act together.
  The fishing investment fund will direct monies from those fishermen 
who break the rules toward assisting fishermen with the ever-growing 
costs of regulatory compliance and to reimburse the legal fees incurred 
by fishermen whose fines were remitted by the recommendation of the 
Special Master.
  Currently, appropriated funds assist fishermen with the costs of 
compliance, but in these difficult fiscal times this funding is 
actually at risk. This legislation would provide a more reliable source 
of funds to offset the increasing cost of compliance, while allowing 
the fishing councils the flexibility to address other priorities, such 
as preparing fishing impact statements and addressing other priorities 
to rebuild or maintain the fishery and the fishing stocks.
  As I have always said, since I was elected and got involved in this 
issue, all the fishermen want is to have a level playing field and an 
assurance that those who break the rules will be caught and they will 
be fined appropriately. That is why I have maintained funding for 
NOAA's legitimate law enforcement responsibilities.
  However, in the end, we should be focused, quite frankly, in this 
Chamber on bettering the economic security and ability of the American 
people to make an honest living. This bill will bring back jobs to the 
hard-working men and women of the American fishing industry while 
restoring their trust in government. It is the right thing to do.
                                 ______