[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 68 (Wednesday, May 7, 2014)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2797-S2799]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
By Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota (for himself, Ms. Murkowski, Mr.
Begich, Mr. Franken, Mr. Heinrich, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Schatz, Mr.
Tester, Mr. Udall of New Mexico, and Mr. King):
S. 2299. A bill to amend the Native American Programs Act of 1974 to
reauthorize a provision to ensure the survival and continuing vitality
of Native American languages; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, today Senator Murkowski
and I introduce the Native American Languages Reauthorization Act of
2014. We are also joined by our fellow colleagues and cosponsors of
this bill: Senators Begich, Franken, Heinrich, Hirono, King, Schatz,
Tester, and Tom Udall.
Since the Native American Languages Act of 1992 became law, we have
made considerable progress in keeping native languages alive. The
Native American Languages Act of 1992 established a grant program
within the Native American Programs Act of 1974 to ensure the survival
of native languages. Through the Health and Human Services Department
Administration for Native Americans, the native languages grant program
has made documented impacts on the revival of Native languages across
Indian Country.
The bill we introduce today will reauthorize the native languages
grant program until fiscal year 2019. The Native language grant program
has made several reports to Congress on the significant impacts that
its grants have for native communities. In the 2012 report on the
Impact and Effectiveness of Administration for Native American
Projects, out of the 63 total language grantees, Administration for
Native Americans evaluated 22 language projects from across Indian
Country. The 2012 impact data showed that from these 22 projects a
total of 178 language teachers were trained; 2,340 youth had increased
their ability to speak a Native language or achieved fluency; and 2,586
adults had increased their ability to speak a Native language or
achieved fluency.
Promoting Native language programs will strengthen our Native
cultures and, according to the National Indian Education Association,
will also promote higher academic success in other areas of learning.
The continuity of Native languages is a link to previous generations
and should be preserved for future generations.
The Native Americans Languages Act has helped to save native
languages and encourages both young children and adults to develop a
fluency in their Native language. Across South Dakota and Indian
Country, this vital grant funding gives the opportunity for our
cherished Native elders to sit down with the younger generation to pass
on native languages. We must continue our efforts to promote Native
language revitalization programs to ensure the preservation of Native
American cultures, histories, and traditions.
I urge my colleagues to join us and reauthorize this important
legislation
[[Page S2798]]
to save and preserve native languages before it is too late.
By Mr. HATCH (for himself, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Portman, Mr. Markey,
Mr. Toomey, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Graham, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr.
Grassley, Mr. McCain, Mr. Cornyn, Ms. Klobuchar, and Mr.
Pryor):
S. 2301. A bill to amend section 2259 of title 18, United States
Code, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, today I will introduce legislation that
will help victims of one of the most vicious crimes and one of the most
evil crimes in our society: child pornography.
When Congress enacted the Violence Against Women Act more than 20
years ago--and I had a lot to do with that, and then-Senator Biden
deserves an awful lot of the credit for that--the law required that the
defendant in a child sexual exploitation case must pay restitution
``for the full amount of the victim's losses.'' Those losses can
include lost income as well as expenses for medical services, therapy,
rehabilitation, transportation, and childcare.
The restitution statute works in a straightforward way for crimes
that involve individual defendants who cause specific harm to
particular victims. But child pornography is different. Victims not
only suffer from the initial abuse, but they continue to suffer as
images of that abuse are created, distributed, and possessed. As the
Supreme Court recently put it, ``Every viewing of child pornography is
a repetition of the victim's abuse.''
In the Internet age, a child pornography victim's abuse never ends,
but identifying everyone who contributes to that ongoing abuse can be
difficult, if not impossible. A predator who commits and records the
abuse might be readily identified. Those who distribute those images,
however, are harder to find, and many who obtain and possess them might
never be identified at all. They may get lost in the crowd. They may
seek safety in shadows. But the harm they cause to victims is no less
devastating.
Our challenge is to craft a restitution statute suited for this
unique kind of crime. We are meeting that challenge today by
introducing the Amy and Vicky Child Pornography Victim Restitution
Improvement Act. Amy and Vicky are victims in two of the most widely
distributed child pornography series in the world. They know how
difficult it is to seek restitution for ongoing harm caused by unknown
people.
The Supreme Court reviewed Amy's case and issued a decision on April
23, titled ``Paroline v. United States.'' The Court said the existing
restitution statute is not suited for her kind of case because it
requires proving how one defendant's possession of particular images
concretely harmed an individual victim. That is simply impossible to
prove and puts the burden on victims forever to chase defendants only
to recover next to nothing.
Several of my colleagues, both Republican and Democratic, joined me
on a legal brief in that case. We hoped that the Supreme Court would
construe the existing statute in a way that was workable to protect
child pornography victims. The Court chose not to do that, and it is up
to Congress to craft a statute that works. I believe we are up to the
task, and the bill I am introducing today is the way to do it.
The Amy and Vicky act creates an effective, balanced restitution
process for victims of child pornography that responds to the Supreme
Court's decision in Paroline v. United States. It does three things.
First, it considers a victim's total losses, including from individuals
who may not have yet been identified. This step reflects the unique
nature of child pornography and its ongoing impact on its victims.
Secondly, the bill requires real and timely restitution and gives
judges options for making that happen. Third, it allows defendants who
have contributed to the same victim's losses to spread the cost of
restitution among themselves. If a victim was harmed by a single
defendant, the defendant must pay full restitution for all of the
victim's losses, but if a victim was harmed by multiple individuals, a
judge has options for imposing restitution on a defendant, depending on
the circumstances of the case. The defendant can be required to pay the
full amount of the victim's losses or the defendant can pay less than
the full amount but at least a statutory minimum for crimes, such as
possession, distribution or production of the child pornography.
In its decision in the Paroline case, the Supreme Court discussed
whether a defendant should pay full restitution for harms that he did
not cause entirely by himself. At the same time, the Court recognized
that the harm from child pornography flows from the trade or the
continuing traffic in the images. It would be perverse to say that as
more individuals contribute to a victim's harm and loss by obtaining
images of her abuse, the less responsible each of them is so that the
victim ends up with nothing. The Amy and Vicky act addresses these
issues.
A defendant may sue others who have harmed the same victim in order
to spread the costs of restitution but must do so in a timely fashion
and only after the victim has received real and timely payment. As my
colleagues may know, Federal law already provides for criminal
defendants who must pay restitution to do so on a payment schedule
suitable for their individual circumstances.
I wish to thank three groups of people who have been critical in
bringing us to this point only 2 weeks after the Supreme Court's
decision. First and foremost, I wish to recognize and thank both Amy
and Vicky, the brave women for whom this bill is named who represent so
many child pornography victims. Amy and Vicky both endorse this
legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that a letter from each of them be printed in
the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Amy's Letter Supporting the Amy and Vicky Child Pornography Victim
Restitution Improvement Act of 2014
I am writing today to give my support to the Amy and Vicky
Child Pornography Victim Restitution Improvement Act of 2014.
It is very important that this law get passed as soon as
possible.
The past eight years of my life have been filled with hope
and horror. Life was pretty horrible when I realized that the
pictures of my childhood sex abuse were on the Internet for
anyone and everyone to see. Imagine the worst most
humiliating moments of your life captured for everyone to see
forever. Then imagine that as a child you didn't even really
know what was happening to you and you didn't want it to
happen but you couldn't stop it. You were abused, raped, and
hurt and this is something that other people want. They enjoy
it. They can't stop collecting it and asking for it and
trading it with other people. And it's you. It's your life
and your pain that they are enjoying. And it never stops and
you are helpless to do anything ever to stop it. That's
horror.
There was also hope. Hope in finding someone who could help
me like my parents and my lawyer. And hope in meeting Joy, my
psychologist, who was the first person who really understood
what I was going through. Then I met Cindy, my therapist, who
also really helped me with all the twists and turns with what
I was feeling when I tried to make sense of my life and what
had happened to me as a child and what is happening to me on
the Internet. I felt lots of hope when my lawyer started
collecting restitution to help me pay my bills and my
therapist and for a car to drive to therapy and to just try
to create some kind of 'normal' life. Things were getting
better and better.
Then we started having problems with the restitution law.
Judges sometimes gave me just $100 and sometimes nothing at
all. A few judges really got it, like when I was at the Fifth
Circuit oral argument two years ago and the judges agreed
that the child sex abuse images of me really do cause ongoing
and long-term harm. The article by Emily Bazelon in the New
York Times also really helped to tell my story so that people
can understand what it's like to live with child pornography
every day of your life. I was really happy to discover
recently that her article received honorable mention in a
contest recognizing excellence in journalism.
After a long time and a lot of court hearings all over the
country, my case was finally at the Supreme Court. I couldn't
believe how long and how far my case and my story had gone
until I was sitting there in the Supreme Court surrounded by
so many of the people who have supported me and helped me
during these years. To hear the justices discussing my case
and my life was really overwhelming and gave me lots of hope
not just for myself but for other victims like Vicky who I
met for the first time right before the oral argument. I know
there were other victims there too who are too afraid to
speak out and too afraid to even think about what happened to
them and what is happening to them online, on the Internet,
because of their childhood sexual abuse and child
pornography. I hoped that at last the very important people
on the Supreme Court would decide that not just me, but all
the victims like me--who were so young when all these
horrible things happened to us--could get the restitution we
need to try and live a life like everyone else.
[[Page S2799]]
All the justices were respectful and it was obvious that
they had thought a lot about the issues. When the oral
argument finished I was really hopeful that we would win the
case. It felt good doing something this significant to make a
difference in the world. It was a great feeling after so many
years of just trying to get it right.
My hope turned to horror when the Court decided two weeks
ago that restitution was ``impossible'' for victims like me
and Vicky and so many others. I couldn't believe that
something which is called mandatory restitution (twice) was
so hard to figure out. It just seemed like something
somewhere was missing. Why, if so many people are committing
this serious crime, why are the victims of that crime, who
are and were children after all, left out? The Court's
decision was even worse than getting no restitution at all.
It was sort of like getting negative restitution. It was a
horrible day.
This is why I am so happy, and hopeful, that Congress can
fix this problem once and for all. Maybe if they put
mandatory in the law for a third time judges will get it that
restitution really really really must be given to victims!
After all this time and all the hearings and appeals and the
Supreme Court, I definitely agree that restitution needs
improvement and hopefully this bill, the Amy and Vicky Child
Pornography Restitution Improvement Act of 2014, can finally
make restitution happen for all victims of this horrible
crime.
Thank you for supporting this law and working so hard to
give victims the hope and help they need to overcome the
nightmares and memories that most others will never know.
Thank you Senator Hatch and Senator Schumer for making my
hope real!
Amy (no longer) Unknown.
____
``Vicky,'' c/o Carol L. Hepburn,
Attorney at Law,
Seattle, WA, May 3, 2014.
Re Support for Amy and Vicky Child Pornography Restitution
Improvement Act
Hon. Orrin Hatch,
Senator, U.S. Congress,
Washington DC.
Dear Senator Hatch: I am the subject of the ``Vicky''
series of child pornography images, which I have been told by
law enforcement agents is one of the most widely traded in
the world. I am writing to you under pseudonym, and through
my attorney, because I have been stalked by pedophiles in the
recent past and I am concerned that disclosure of my legal
name and address could lead to further stalking.
I appreciate the Supreme Court's recent recognition in the
Paroline decision of the pain and loss suffered by victims
and the need for mandatory restitution. This upholds both the
victim's need for compensation and helping the offender
realize they have hurt an actual person. The difficult part
of this decision is the immense amount of time and work
investment that will be required by the victim to collect
restitution, without the guarantee that they will ever
collect the full amount to be made whole again. With each
case in which the victim seeks restitution from someone who
has possessed and/or distributed their images, there is an
emotional cost just for being involved in the case. It brings
up the painful reality of the victim's situation of never-
ending humiliation and puts it right in the victim's face
once again. This decision places on the victim the huge
burden of several years of litigation without any promise of
closure. This is a dismal prospect because it leaves victims
like Amy and myself with the choice between not pursuing
restitution (which would not provide us with the help we
desperately need to heal) or continuing to have this painful
part of our lives in our face on a regular basis for several
more years, if not decades. Without any guidelines as to how
the district courts will calculate restitution from each
offender, I worry that the emotional toll may not be
adequately compensated for in the end. I sincerely hope that
Congress will take the time to create some guidelines for
restitution for victims of child pornography possession and
distribution that will protect the victim and enable them to
receive full compensation.
I would be happy to talk with you about this at some later
time. I am currently very pregnant and due to deliver my
first child in two weeks. I respectfully ask that you support
this legislation and do all that you can to see that it
becomes law.
Very truly yours,
``Vicky''.
Mr. HATCH. Second, I wish to thank Amy and Vicky's legal team who
were instrumental in developing this legislation. They include
Professor Paul Cassell at the University of Utah School of Law, one of
the leading authorities on criminal law in this country, and attorneys
James Marsh of New York and Carol Hepburn in Seattle. Professor Cassell
argued the Paroline case before the Supreme Court, and it is the
experience of these tireless advocates that informed how to respond to
that decision.
Third, I wish to thank the Senators on both sides of the aisle who
join me in introducing this bill. In particular, I wish to recognize
the senior Senator from New York Mr. Schumer who also signed on to the
legal brief I filed in the Paroline case. We serve together on the
Judiciary Committee, and he has long been a champion for crime victims.
I ask unanimous consent that an editorial from today's Washington
Post be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Washington Post, May 6, 2014]
Congress Needs To Act To Allow Victims of Child Sex Abuse To Recover
Restitution
(By Editoria1 Board)
``I am a 19 year old girl and I am a victim of child sex
abuse and child pornography. I am still discovering all the
ways that the abuse and exploitation I suffer has hurt me. .
. .'' So began the victim impact statement of a young woman
who was 8 when she was raped but whose abuse has never ended
because the uncle who assaulted her took pictures that have
been widely trafficked on the Internet. ``It is hard to
describe what it feels like to know that at any moment,
anywhere, someone is looking at pictures of me as a little
girl being abused by my uncle and is getting some kind of
sick enjoyment from it,'' she wrote.
The Supreme Court did not dispute her suffering nor her
right to receive restitution from viewers who take pleasure
in her abuse and create the sordid market demand for child
pornography. But the court set aside the $3.4 million awarded
her. Now Congress needs to fix the law.
The 5-to-4 ruling in Paroline v. United States is a double-
edged sword for the advocates of child pornography victims.
It upholds part of the Violence Against Women Act, which
calls for restitution to victims such as ``Amy Unknown,'' as
the woman is identified in court papers, but it limits the
amount of damages proximate to the harm caused by a specific
offender--a standard that puts the burden on the victim and
makes it difficult to collect damages.
Doyle Randall Paroline, who pleaded guilty to possessing
child pornography that included images of Amy, was ordered by
an appeals court to pay all of the $3.4 million owed to Amy
for the psychological damage and lost income she has
suffered. The court's majority, in an opinion written by
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, ruled that Mr. Paroline should be
assessed an amount that is not trivial but comports with
``the defendant's relative role in the causal process that
underlies the victim's general losses.''
Justice Kennedy acknowledged that his approach ``is not
without difficulties.'' How should a court calculate the harm
caused by one person's possession of an image seen by
thousands? Mathematically dividing the total amount by the
number of estimated views produces an amount so small as to
be insulting rather than therapeutic. What, in short, is the
right number between zero and $3.4 million?
The justices are right in thinking that Congress should
revisit the issue. Legislation set to be introduced Wednesday
by Sens. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Orrin G. Hatch (R-
Utah) seems to be a step in the right direction, with its
outline of options for full victim recovery when multiple
individuals are involved and giving multiple defendants who
have banned the same victim the ability to sue each other to
spread the cost of restitution. The court was clear in its
opinion that ``the victim should someday collect restitution
for all her child pornography losses.'' Congress needs to
provide the tools to turn that someday into reality.
Mr. HATCH. It says that the Amy and Vicky Child Pornography Victim
Restitution Improvement Act is ``a step in the right direction.''
I urge all of my colleagues to join us in enacting this legislation.
It creates a practical process and recognizes the unique kind of harm
caused by child pornography and requires restitution in a manner that
will actually help victims.
In her letter, Amy writes that the legislation we are introducing
today ``can finally make restitution happen for all victims of this
horrible crime.''
Let's get it done.
____________________