[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 22, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H4302-H4319]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




FORMERLY INCARCERATED REENTER SOCIETY TRANSFORMED SAFELY TRANSITIONING 
                            EVERY PERSON ACT

  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 5682) to provide for programs to help reduce the risk that 
prisoners will recidivate upon release from prison, and for other 
purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H. R. 5682

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Formerly 
     Incarcerated Reenter Society Transformed Safely Transitioning 
     Every Person Act'' or the ``FIRST STEP Act''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

                     TITLE I--RECIDIVISM REDUCTION

Sec. 101. Risk and needs assessment system.
Sec. 102. Implementation of system and recommendations by Bureau of 
              Prisons.
Sec. 103. GAO Report.
Sec. 104. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 105. Rule of construction.
Sec. 106. Faith-based considerations.

          TITLE II--BUREAU OF PRISONS SECURE FIREARMS STORAGE

Sec. 201. Short title.
Sec. 202. Secure firearms storage.

         TITLE III--RESTRAINTS ON PREGNANT PRISONERS PROHIBITED

Sec. 301. Use of restraints on prisoners during the period of pregnancy 
              and postpartum recovery prohibited.

                TITLE IV--MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Sec. 401. Placement of prisoners close to families.
Sec. 402. Home confinement for low risk prisoners.
Sec. 403. Federal prisoner reentry initiative reauthorization; 
              modification of imposed term of imprisonment.
Sec. 404. Identification for returning citizens.
Sec. 405. Expanding inmate employment through Federal prison 
              industries.
Sec. 406. De-escalation training.
Sec. 407. Evidence-based treatment for opioid and heroin abuse.
Sec. 408. Pilot programs.
Sec. 409. Ensuring supervision of released sexually dangerous persons.
Sec. 410. Data collection.
Sec. 411. Healthcare products.
Sec. 412. Prison rape elimination standards auditors.
Sec. 413. Adult and juvenile collaboration programs.

                     TITLE I--RECIDIVISM REDUCTION

     SEC. 101. RISK AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT SYSTEM.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 229 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after subchapter C the 
     following:

            ``SUBCHAPTER D--RISK AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

``Sec.
``3631. Duties of the Attorney General.
``3632. Development of risk and needs assessment system.
``3633. Evidence-based recidivism reduction program and 
              recommendations.
``3634. Report.
``3635. Definitions.

     ``Sec. 3631. Duties of the Attorney General

       ``(a) In General.--The Attorney General shall carry out 
     this subchapter in consultation with--
       ``(1) the Director of the Bureau of Prisons;
       ``(2) the Director of the Administrative Office of the 
     United States Courts;
       ``(3) the Director of the Office of Probation and Pretrial 
     Services;
       ``(4) the Director of the National Institute of Justice; 
     and
       ``(5) the Director of the National Institute of 
     Corrections.
       ``(b) Duties.--The Attorney General shall--
       ``(1) conduct a review of the existing prisoner risk and 
     needs assessment systems in operation on the date of the 
     enactment of the FIRST STEP Act;
       ``(2) develop recommendations regarding evidence-based 
     recidivism reduction programs and productive activities in 
     accordance with section 3633;

[[Page H4303]]

       ``(3) conduct ongoing research and data analysis on--
       ``(A) evidence-based recidivism reduction programs relating 
     to the use of prisoner risk and needs assessment tools;
       ``(B) the most effective and efficient uses of such 
     programs;
       ``(C) which evidence-based recidivism reduction programs 
     are the most effective at reducing recidivism, and the type, 
     amount, and intensity of programming that most effectively 
     reduces the risk of recidivism; and
       ``(D) products purchased by Federal agencies that are 
     manufactured overseas and could be manufactured by prisoners 
     participating in a prison work program without reducing job 
     opportunities for other workers in the United States;
       ``(4) on an annual basis, review and validate the risk and 
     needs assessment system, which review shall include--
       ``(A) any subsequent changes to the risk and needs 
     assessment system made after the date of the enactment of 
     this subchapter;
       ``(B) the recommendations developed under paragraph (2), 
     using the research conducted under paragraph (3);
       ``(C) an evaluation to ensure that the risk and needs 
     assessment system bases the assessment of each prisoner's 
     risk of recidivism on indicators of progress, and of 
     regression that are dynamic and that can reasonably be 
     expected to change while in prison;
       ``(D) statistical validation of any tools that the risk and 
     needs assessment system uses; and
       ``(E) an evaluation of the rates of recidivism among 
     similarly classified prisoners to identify any unwarranted 
     disparities, including disparities among similarly classified 
     prisoners of different demographic groups, in such rates;
       ``(5) make any revisions or updates to the risk and needs 
     assessment system that the Attorney General determines 
     appropriate pursuant to the review under paragraph (4), 
     including updates to ensure that any disparities identified 
     in paragraph (4)(E) are reduced to the greatest extent 
     possible; and
       ``(6) report to Congress in accordance with section 3634.

     ``Sec. 3632. Development of risk and needs assessment system

       ``(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     of the enactment of the FIRST STEP Act, the Attorney General 
     shall develop and release a risk and needs assessment system 
     (referred to in this subchapter as the `System'), which shall 
     be used to--
       ``(1) determine the recidivism risk of each prisoner as 
     part of the intake process, and classify each prisoner as 
     having minimum, low, medium, or high risk for recidivism;
       ``(2) assess and determine, to the extent practicable, the 
     risk of violent or serious misconduct of each prisoner;
       ``(3) determine the type, amount, and intensity of 
     evidence-based recidivism reduction programs that are 
     appropriate for each prisoner and assign each prisoner to 
     such programs accordingly, and based on the prisoner's 
     specific criminogenic needs, and in accordance with 
     subsection (b);
       ``(4) reassess the recidivism risk of each prisoner 
     periodically and reassign the prisoner to appropriate 
     evidence-based recidivism reduction programs or productive 
     activities based on the revised determination to ensure 
     that--
       ``(A) all prisoners at each risk level have a meaningful 
     opportunity to reduce their classification during the period 
     of incarceration;
       ``(B) to address the specific criminogenic needs of the 
     prisoner; and
       ``(C) all prisoners are able to successfully participate in 
     such programs;
       ``(5) determine when to provide incentives and rewards for 
     successful participation in evidence-based recidivism 
     reduction programs or productive activities in accordance 
     with subsection (e); and
       ``(6) determine when a prisoner is ready to transfer into 
     prerelease custody in accordance with section 3624(c).
     In carrying out this subsection, the Attorney General may use 
     existing risk and needs assessment tools, as appropriate.
       ``(b) Assignment of Evidence-based Recidivism Reduction 
     Programs.--The System shall provide guidance on the type, 
     amount, and intensity of evidence-based recidivism reduction 
     programming and productive activities that shall be assigned 
     for each prisoner, including--
       ``(1) programs in which the Bureau of Prisons shall assign 
     the prisoner to participate, according to the prisoner's 
     specific criminogenic needs; and
       ``(2) information on the best ways that the Bureau of 
     Prisons can tailor the programs to the specific criminogenic 
     needs of each prisoner so as to most effectively lower each 
     prisoner's risk of recidivism.
       ``(c) Housing and Assignment Decisions.--The System shall 
     provide guidance on program grouping and housing assignment 
     determinations and, after accounting for the safety of each 
     prisoner and other individuals at the prison, provide that 
     prisoners with a similar risk level be grouped together in 
     housing and assignment decisions to the extent practicable.
       ``(d) Evidence-based Recidivism Reduction Program 
     Incentives and Productive Activities Rewards.--The System 
     shall provide incentives and rewards for prisoners to 
     participate in and complete evidence-based recidivism 
     reduction programs as follows:
       ``(1) Phone and visitation privileges.--A prisoner who is 
     successfully participating in an evidence-based recidivism 
     reduction program shall receive--
       ``(A) phone privileges, or, if available, video 
     conferencing privileges, for up to 30 minutes per day, and up 
     to 510 minutes per month; and
       ``(B) additional time for visitation at the prison, as 
     determined by the warden of the prison.
       ``(2) Transfer to institution closer to release 
     residence.--A prisoner who is successfully participating in 
     an evidence-based recidivism reduction program shall be 
     considered by the Bureau of Prisons for placement in a 
     facility closer to the prisoner's release residence upon 
     request from the prisoner and subject to--
       ``(A) bed availability at the transfer facility;
       ``(B) the prisoner's security designation; and
       ``(C) the recommendation from the warden of the prison at 
     which the prisoner is incarcerated at the time of making the 
     request.
       ``(3) Additional policies.--The Director of the Bureau of 
     Prisons shall develop additional policies to provide 
     appropriate incentives for successful participation and 
     completion of evidence-based recidivism reduction 
     programming. Such incentives shall include not less than two 
     of the following:
       ``(A) Increased commissary spending limits and product 
     offerings.
       ``(B) Extended opportunities to access the email system.
       ``(C) Consideration of transfer to preferred housing units 
     (including transfer to different prison facilities).
       ``(D) Other incentives solicited from prisoners and 
     determined appropriate by the Director.
       ``(4) Time credits.--
       ``(A) In general.--A prisoner, except for an ineligible 
     prisoner under subparagraph (D), who successfully completes 
     evidence-based recidivism reduction programming or productive 
     activities, shall earn time credits as follows:
       ``(i) A prisoner shall earn 10 days of time credits for 
     every 30 days of successful participation in evidence-based 
     recidivism reduction programming or productive activities.
       ``(ii) A prisoner determined by the Bureau of Prisons to be 
     at a minimum or low risk for recidivating, who, over two 
     consecutive assessments, has not increased their risk of 
     recidivism, shall earn an additional 5 days of time credits 
     for every 30 days of successful participation in evidence-
     based recidivism reduction programming or productive 
     activities.
       ``(B) Availability.--A prisoner may not earn time credits 
     under this paragraph for an evidence-based recidivism 
     reduction program that the prisoner successfully completed--
       ``(i) prior to the date of the enactment of this Act;
       ``(ii) during official detention prior to the date that the 
     prisoner's sentence commences under section 3585(a); or
       ``(iii) if that prisoner is an inadmissible or deportable 
     alien under the immigration laws (as such term is defined in 
     section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1101)).
       ``(C) Application of time credits toward pre-release 
     custody.--Time credits earned under this paragraph by 
     prisoners who successfully participate in recidivism 
     reduction programs or productive activities and who have been 
     determined to be at minimum risk or low risk for recidivating 
     pursuant to their last two reassessments shall be applied 
     toward time in pre-release custody. The Director of the 
     Bureau of Prisons shall transfer prisoners described in this 
     subparagraph into prerelease custody, except that the 
     Director of the Bureau of Prisons may deny such a transfer if 
     the warden of the prison finds by clear and convincing 
     evidence that the prisoner should not be transferred into 
     prerelease custody based only on evidence of the prisoner's 
     actions after the conviction of such prisoner and not based 
     on evidence from the underlying conviction, and submits a 
     detailed written statement regarding such finding to the 
     Director of the Bureau of Prisons.
       ``(D) Ineligible prisoners.--A prisoner is ineligible to 
     receive time credits under this paragraph if the prisoner is 
     serving a sentence for a conviction under any of the 
     following provisions of law:
       ``(i) Section 113(a)(1), relating to assault with intent to 
     commit murder.
       ``(ii) Section 115, relating to influencing, impeding, or 
     retaliating against a Federal official by injuring a family 
     member, except for a threat made in violation of that 
     section.
       ``(iii) Any section of chapter 10, relating to biological 
     weapons.
       ``(iv) Any section of chapter 11B, relating to chemical 
     weapons.
       ``(v) Section 351, relating to Congressional, Cabinet, and 
     Supreme Court assassination, kidnapping, and assault.
       ``(vi) Section 793, relating to gathering, transmitting, or 
     losing defense information.
       ``(vii) Section 794, relating to gathering or delivering 
     defense information to aid a foreign government.
       ``(viii) Any section of chapter 39, relating to explosives 
     and other dangerous articles, except for section 836 
     (relating to the transportation of fireworks into a State 
     prohibiting sale or use).
       ``(ix) Section 842(p), relating to distribution of 
     information relating to explosive, destructive devices, and 
     weapons of mass destruction, but only if the conviction 
     involved a weapon of mass destruction (as defined in section 
     2332a(c)(2) of such title).

[[Page H4304]]

       ``(x) Subsection (f)(3), (h), or (i) of section 844, 
     relating to the use of fire or an explosive.
       ``(xi) Section 924(e), relating to unlawful possession of a 
     firearm by a person with 3 or more convictions for a violent 
     felony.
       ``(xii) Section 1030(a)(1), relating to fraud and related 
     activity in connection with computers.
       ``(xiii) Any section of chapter 51, relating to homicide, 
     except for section 1112 (relating to manslaughter), 1113 
     (relating to attempt to commit murder or manslaughter, but 
     only if the conviction was for an attempt to commit 
     manslaughter), 1115 (relating to misconduct or neglect of 
     ship officers), or 1122 (relating to protection against the 
     human immunodeficiency virus).
       ``(xiv) Any section of chapter 55, relating to kidnapping.
       ``(xv) Any offense under chapter 77, relating to peonage, 
     slavery, and trafficking in persons, except for sections 1592 
     through 1596.
       ``(xvi) Section 1751, relating to Presidential and 
     Presidential staff assassination, kidnapping, and assault.
       ``(xvii) Section 1841(a)(2)(C), relating to intentionally 
     killing or attempting to kill an unborn child.
       ``(xviii) Section 1992, relating to terrorist attacks and 
     other violence against railroad carriers and against mass 
     transportation systems on land, on water, or through the air.
       ``(xix) Section 2113(e), relating to bank robbery resulting 
     in death.
       ``(xx) Section 2118(c)(2), relating to robberies and 
     burglaries involving controlled substances resulting in 
     death.
       ``(xxi) Section 2119(3), relating to taking a motor vehicle 
     (commonly referred to as `carjacking') that results in death.
       ``(xxii) Any section of chapter 105, relating to sabotage, 
     except for section 2152.
       ``(xxiii) Any section of chapter 109A, relating to sexual 
     abuse, except that with regard to section 2244, only a 
     conviction under subsection (c) of that section (relating to 
     abusive sexual contact involving young children) shall make a 
     prisoner ineligible under this subparagraph.
       ``(xxiv) Section 2251, relating to the sexual exploitation 
     of children.
       ``(xxv) Section 2251A, relating to the selling or buying of 
     children.
       ``(xxvi) Any of paragraphs (1) through (3) of section 
     2252(a), relating to certain activities relating to material 
     involving the sexual exploitation of minors.
       ``(xxvii) A second or subsequent conviction under any of 
     paragraphs (1) through (6) of section 2252A(a), relating to 
     certain activities relating to material constituting or 
     containing child pornography.
       ``(xxviii) Section 2260, relating to the production of 
     sexually explicit depictions of a minor for importation into 
     the United States.
       ``(xxix) Section 2283, relating to the transportation of 
     explosive, biological, chemical, or radioactive or nuclear 
     materials.
       ``(xxx) Section 2284, relating to the transportation of 
     terrorists.
       ``(xxxi) Section 2291, relating to the destruction of a 
     vessel or maritime facility, but only if the conduct which 
     led to the conviction involved a substantial risk of death or 
     serious bodily injury.
       ``(xxxii) Any section of chapter 113B, relating to 
     terrorism.
       ``(xxxiii) Section 2340A, relating to torture.
       ``(xxxiv) Section 2381, relating to treason.
       ``(xxxv) Section 2442, relating to the recruitment or use 
     of child soldiers.
       ``(xxxvi) Section 57(b) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 
     (42 U.S.C. 2077(b)), relating to the engagement or 
     participation in the development or production of special 
     nuclear material.
       ``(xxxvii) Section 92 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 
     U.S.C. 2122), relating to prohibitions governing atomic 
     weapons.
       ``(xxxviii) Section 101 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 
     (42 U.S.C. 2131), relating to the atomic energy license 
     requirement.
       ``(xxxix) Section 224 or 225 of the Atomic Energy Act of 
     1954 (42 U.S.C. 2274, 2275), relating to the communication or 
     receipt of restricted data.
       ``(xl) Section 236 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 
     U.S.C. 2284), relating to the sabotage of nuclear facilities 
     or fuel.
       ``(xli) Section 60123(b) of title 49, United States Code, 
     relating to damaging or destroying a pipeline facility, but 
     only if the conduct which led to the conviction involved a 
     substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
       ``(xlii) Section 401(a) of the Controlled Substances Act 
     (21 U.S.C. 841), relating to manufacturing or distributing a 
     controlled substance, but only in the case of a conviction 
     for an offense described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of 
     subsection (b)(1) of that section for which death or serious 
     bodily injury resulted from the use of such substance.
       ``(xliii) Section 276(a) of the Immigration and Nationality 
     Act (8 U.S.C. 1326), relating to the reentry of a removed 
     alien, but only if the alien is described in paragraph (1) or 
     (2) of subsection (b) of that section.
       ``(xliv) Any section of the Export Administration Act of 
     1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2401 et seq.)
       ``(xlv) Section 206 of the International Emergency Economic 
     Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1705).
       ``(xlvi) Section 601 of the National Security Act of 1947 
     (50 U.S.C. 3121), relating to the protection of identities of 
     certain United States undercover intelligence officers, 
     agents, informants, and sources.
       ``(xlvii) An offense described in section 3559(c)(2)(F), 
     for which the offender was sentenced to a term of 
     imprisonment of more than one year, if the offender has a 
     previous conviction, for which the offender served a term of 
     imprisonment of more than one year, for a Federal or State 
     offense, by whatever designation and wherever committed, 
     consisting of murder (as described in section 1111), 
     voluntary manslaughter (as described in section 1112), 
     assault with intent to commit murder (as described in section 
     113(a)), aggravated sexual abuse and sexual abuse (as 
     described in sections 2241 and 2242), abusive sexual contact 
     (as described in sections 2244(a)(1) and (a)(2)), kidnapping 
     (as described in chapter 55), carjacking (as described in 
     section 2119), arson (as described in section 844(f)(3), (h), 
     or (i)), or terrorism (as described in chapter 113B).
       ``(xlviii) Section 2118(c)(2) of title 18, United States 
     Code, relating to robberies and burglaries involving 
     controlled substances resulting in death.
       ``(5) Risk reassessments and level adjustment.--A prisoner 
     who successfully participates in evidence-based recidivism 
     reduction programming or productive activities shall receive 
     periodic risk reassessments not less often than annually, and 
     a prisoner determined to be at a medium or high risk of 
     recidivating and who has less than 5 years until his or her 
     projected release date shall receive more frequent risk 
     reassessments. If the reassessment shows that the prisoner's 
     risk of recidivating or specific needs have changed, the 
     Bureau of Prisons shall update the determination of the 
     prisoner's risk of recidivating or information regarding the 
     prisoner's specific needs and reassign the prisoner to 
     appropriate evidence-based recidivism reduction programming 
     or productive activities based on such changes.
       ``(6) Relation to other incentive programs.--The incentives 
     described in this subsection shall be in addition to any 
     other rewards or incentives for which a prisoner may be 
     eligible.
       ``(e) Penalties.--The Director of the Bureau of Prisons 
     shall develop guidelines for the reduction of rewards and 
     incentives earned under subsection (e) for prisoners who 
     violate prison rules or evidence-based recidivism reduction 
     program or productive activity rules, which shall provide--
       ``(1) general levels of violations and resulting 
     reductions;
       ``(2) that any reduction that includes the loss of time 
     credits shall require written notice to the prisoner, shall 
     be limited to time credits that a prisoner earned as of the 
     date of the prisoner's rule violation, and shall not include 
     any future time credits that the prisoner may earn; and
       ``(3) for a procedure to restore time credits that a 
     prisoner lost as a result of a rule violation based on the 
     prisoner's individual progress after the date of the rule 
     violation.
       ``(f) Bureau of Prisons Training.--The Attorney General 
     shall develop and implement training programs for Bureau of 
     Prisons officers and employees responsible for administering 
     the System, which shall include--
       ``(1) initial training to educate officers and employees on 
     how to use the System in an appropriate and consistent 
     manner, as well as the reasons for using the System;
       ``(2) continuing education;
       ``(3) periodic training updates; and
       ``(4) a requirement that such officers and employees 
     demonstrate competence in administering the System, including 
     interrater reliability, on a biannual basis.
       ``(g) Quality Assurance.--In order to ensure that the 
     Bureau of Prisons is using the System in an appropriate and 
     consistent manner, the Attorney General shall monitor and 
     assess the use of the System, which shall include conducting 
     annual audits of the Bureau of Prisons regarding the use of 
     the System.

     ``Sec. 3633. Evidence-based recidivism reduction program and 
       recommendations

       ``Prior to releasing the System, the Attorney General 
     shall--
       ``(1) review the effectiveness of evidence-based recidivism 
     reduction programs that exist as of the date of the enactment 
     of this subchapter in prisons operated by the Bureau of 
     Prisons;
       ``(2) review available information regarding the 
     effectiveness of evidence-based recidivism reduction programs 
     and productive activities that exist in State-operated 
     prisons throughout the United States;
       ``(3) identify the most effective evidence-based recidivism 
     reduction programs;
       ``(4) review the policies for entering into evidence-based 
     recidivism reduction partnerships described in section 
     3621(h)(5); and
       ``(5) direct the Bureau of Prisons regarding--
       ``(A) evidence-based recidivism reduction programs;
       ``(B) the ability for faith-based organizations to function 
     as a provider of educational evidence-based programs outside 
     of the religious classes and services provided through the 
     Chaplaincy; and
       ``(C) the addition of any new effective evidence-based 
     recidivism reduction programs that the Attorney General 
     finds.

     ``Sec. 3634. Report

       ``Beginning on the date that is two years after the date of 
     the enactment of this subchapter, and annually thereafter for 
     a period of 5 years, the Attorney General shall submit a 
     report to the Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate and 
     the House of Representatives and the Subcommittees on 
     Commerce,

[[Page H4305]]

     Justice, Science, and Related Agencies of the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
     that contains the following:
       ``(1) A summary of the activities and accomplishments of 
     the Attorney General in carrying out this Act.
       ``(2) A summary and assessment of the types and 
     effectiveness of the evidence-based recidivism reduction 
     programs and productive activities in prisons operated by the 
     Bureau of Prisons, including--
       ``(A) evidence about which programs have been shown to 
     reduce recidivism;
       ``(B) the capacity of each program and activity at each 
     prison, including the number of prisoners along with the 
     recidivism risk of each prisoner enrolled in each program; 
     and
       ``(C) identification of any gaps or shortages in capacity 
     of such programs and activities.
       ``(3) Rates of recidivism among individuals who have been 
     released from Federal prison, based on the following 
     criteria:
       ``(A) The primary offense of conviction.
       ``(B) The length of the sentence imposed and served.
       ``(C) The Bureau of Prisons facility or facilities in which 
     the prisoner's sentence was served.
       ``(D) The evidence-based recidivism reduction programming 
     that the prisoner successfully completed, if any.
       ``(E) The prisoner's assessed and reassessed risk of 
     recidivism.
       ``(F) The productive activities that the prisoner 
     successfully completed, if any.
       ``(4) The status of prison work programs at facilities 
     operated by the Bureau of Prisons, including--
       ``(A) a strategy to expand the availability of such 
     programs without reducing job opportunities for workers in 
     the United States who are not in the custody of the Bureau of 
     Prisons, including the feasibility of prisoners manufacturing 
     products purchased by Federal agencies that are manufactured 
     overseas;
       ``(B) an assessment of the feasibility of expanding such 
     programs, consistent with the strategy required under 
     subparagraph (A), with the goal that 5 years after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, not less than 75 percent of 
     eligible minimum and low risk offenders have the opportunity 
     to participate in a prison work program for not less than 20 
     hours per week; and
       ``(C) a detailed discussion of legal authorities that would 
     be useful or necessary to achieve the goals described in 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B).
       ``(5) An assessment of the Bureau of Prisons' compliance 
     with section 3621(h).
       ``(6) An assessment of progress made toward carrying out 
     the purposes of this subchapter, including any savings 
     associated with--
       ``(A) the transfer of prisoners into prerelease custody 
     under section 3624(g) including savings resulting from the 
     avoidance or deferral of future construction, acquisition, 
     and operations costs; and
       ``(B) any decrease in recidivism that may be attributed to 
     the System or the increase in evidence-based recidivism 
     reduction programs required under chapter.
       ``(7) Recommendations for how to reinvest any savings into 
     other Federal, State, and local law enforcement activities 
     and evidence-based recidivism reduction programs in the 
     Bureau of Prisons.

     ``Sec. 3635. Definitions

       ``In this subchapter the following definitions apply:
       ``(1) Evidence-based recidivism reduction program.--The 
     term `evidence-based recidivism reduction program' means 
     either a group or individual activity that--
       ``(A) has been shown by empirical evidence to reduce 
     recidivism or is based on research indicating that it is 
     likely to be effective in reducing recidivism;
       ``(B) is designed to help prisoners succeed in their 
     communities upon release from prison; and
       ``(C) may include--
       ``(i) social learning and communication, interpersonal, 
     anti-bullying, rejection response, and other life skills;
       ``(ii) family relationship building, structured parent-
     child interaction, and parenting skills;
       ``(iii) classes on morals or ethics;
       ``(iv) academic classes;
       ``(v) cognitive behavioral treatment;
       ``(vi) mentoring;
       ``(vii) substance abuse treatment;
       ``(viii) vocational training;
       ``(ix) faith-based classes or services;
       ``(x) civic engagement and reintegrative community 
     services;
       ``(xi) a prison job, including through a prison work 
     program;
       ``(xii) victim impact classes or other restorative justice 
     programs; and
       ``(xiii) trauma counseling and trauma-informed support 
     programs.
       ``(2) Prisoner.--The term `prisoner' means a person who has 
     been sentenced to a term of imprisonment pursuant to a 
     conviction for a Federal criminal offense, or a person in the 
     custody of the Bureau of Prisons.
       ``(3) Risk and needs assessment tool.--The term `risk and 
     needs assessment tool' means an objective and statistically 
     validated method through which information is collected and 
     evaluated to determine--
       ``(A) the risk that a prisoner will recidivate upon release 
     from prison; and
       ``(B) the recidivism reduction programs that will best 
     minimize the risk that the prisoner will recidivate upon 
     release from prison.
       ``(4) Productive activity.--The term `productive activity' 
     means either a group or individual activity that is designed 
     to allow prisoners determined as having a minimum or low risk 
     of recidivating to remain productive and thereby maintain a 
     minimum or low risk of recidivating, and may include the 
     delivery of the programs described in paragraph (1) to other 
     prisoners.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of subchapters for 
     chapter 229 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

``D. Risk and Needs Assessment System.......................3631''.....

     SEC. 102. IMPLEMENTATION OF SYSTEM AND RECOMMENDATIONS BY 
                   BUREAU OF PRISONS.

       (a) Implementation of System Generally.--Section 3621 of 
     title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(h)  Implementation of Risk and Needs Assessment 
     System.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     Attorney General completes and releases the risk and needs 
     assessment system (referred to in this subsection as the 
     `System') developed under subchapter D, the Director of the 
     Bureau of Prisons shall, in accordance with that subchapter--
       ``(A) implement and complete the initial intake risk and 
     needs assessment for each prisoner (including for each 
     prisoner who was a prisoner prior to the effective date of 
     this subsection), regardless of the prisoner's length of 
     imposed term of imprisonment, and begin to assign prisoners 
     to appropriate evidence-based recidivism reduction programs 
     based on that determination;
       ``(B) begin to expand the effective evidence-based 
     recidivism reduction programs and productive activities it 
     offers and add any new evidence-based recidivism reduction 
     programs and productive activities necessary to effectively 
     implement the System; and
       ``(C) begin to implement the other risk and needs 
     assessment tools necessary to effectively implement the 
     System over time, while prisoners are participating in and 
     completing the effective evidence-based recidivism reduction 
     programs and productive activities.
       ``(2) Phase-in.--In order to carry out paragraph (1), so 
     that every prisoner has the opportunity to participate in and 
     complete the type, amount, and intensity of evidence-based 
     recidivism reduction programs or productive activities they 
     need, and be reassessed for recidivism risk as necessary to 
     effectively implement the System, the Bureau of Prisons 
     shall--
       ``(A) provide such evidence-based recidivism reduction 
     programs and productive activities for all prisoners before 
     the date that is 2 years after the date on which the Bureau 
     of Prisons completes a risk and needs assessment for each 
     prisoner under paragraph (1)(A); and
       ``(B) develop and validate the risk and needs assessment 
     tool to be used in the reassessments of risk of recidivism, 
     while prisoners are participating in and completing evidence-
     based recidivism reduction programs and productive 
     activities.
       ``(3) Priority during phase-in.--During the 2-year period 
     described in paragraph (2)(A), the priority for such programs 
     and activities shall be accorded based on a prisoner's 
     proximity to release date.
       ``(4) Preliminary expansion of evidence-based recidivism 
     reduction programs and authority to use incentives.--
     Beginning on the date of the enactment of the FIRST STEP Act, 
     the Bureau of Prisons may begin to expand any evidence-based 
     recidivism reduction programs and productive activities that 
     exist at a prison as of such date, and may offer to prisoners 
     who successfully participate in such programs and activities 
     the incentives and rewards described in subchapter D.
       ``(5) Recidivism reduction partnerships.--In order to 
     expand evidence-based recidivism reduction programs and 
     productive activities, the Attorney General shall develop 
     policies for the warden of each prison of the Bureau of 
     Prisons to enter into partnerships, subject to the 
     availability of appropriations, with any of the following:
       ``(A) Nonprofit and other private organizations, including 
     faith-based, art, and community-based organizations that will 
     deliver recidivism reduction programming on a paid or 
     volunteer basis.
       ``(B) Institutions of higher education (as defined in 
     section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     1001) that will deliver instruction on a paid or volunteer 
     basis.
       ``(C) Private entities that will--
       ``(i) deliver vocational training and certifications;
       ``(ii) provide equipment to facilitate vocational training 
     or employment opportunities for prisoners;
       ``(iii) employ prisoners; or
       ``(iv) assist prisoners in prerelease custody or supervised 
     release in finding employment.
       ``(D) Industry-sponsored organizations that will deliver 
     workforce development and training, on a paid or volunteer 
     basis.
       ``(6) Requirement to provide programs to all prisoners; 
     priority.--The Director of the Bureau of Prisons shall 
     provide all prisoners with the opportunity to actively 
     participate in evidence-based recidivism reduction programs 
     or productive activities, according to their specific 
     criminogenic needs,

[[Page H4306]]

     throughout their entire term of incarceration. Priority for 
     participation in recidivism reduction programs shall be given 
     to medium risk and high risk prisoners, with access to 
     productive activities given to minimum risk and low risk 
     prisoners.
       ``(7) Definitions.--The terms in this subsection have the 
     meaning given those terms in section 3635.''.
       (b) Prerelease Custody.--
       (1) In general.--Section 3624 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (A) in subsection (b)(1)--
       (i) by striking ``, beyond the time served, of up to 54 
     days at the end of each year of the prisoner's term of 
     imprisonment, beginning at the end of the first year of the 
     term,'' and inserting ``of up to 54 days for each year of the 
     prisoner's sentence imposed by the court,'';
       (ii) by striking ``credit for the last year or portion of a 
     year of the term of imprisonment shall be prorated and 
     credited within the last six weeks of the sentence'' and 
     inserting ``credit for the last year of a term of 
     imprisonment shall be credited on the first day of the last 
     year of the term of imprisonment''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(g) Prerelease Custody for Risk and Needs Assessment 
     System Participants.--
       ``(1) Eligible prisoners.--This subsection applies in the 
     case of a prisoner (as such term is defined in section 3635) 
     who--
       ``(A) has earned time credits under the risk and needs 
     assessment system developed under subchapter D (referred to 
     in this subsection as the `System') in an amount that is 
     equal to the remainder of the prisoner's imposed term of 
     imprisonment;
       ``(B) has shown through the periodic risk reassessments a 
     demonstrated recidivism risk reduction or has maintained a 
     minimum or low recidivism risk, during the prisoner's term of 
     imprisonment;
       ``(C) has been classified by the warden of the prison as 
     otherwise qualified to be transferred into prerelease 
     custody; and
       ``(D)(i) has been determined under the System to be a 
     minimum or low risk to recidivate; or
       ``(ii) has had a petition to be transferred to prerelease 
     custody approved by the warden of the prison, after the 
     warden's determination that--
       ``(I) the prisoner would not be a danger to society if 
     transferred to prerelease custody;
       ``(II) the prisoner has made a good faith effort to lower 
     their recidivism risk through participation in recidivism 
     reduction programs or productive activities;
       ``(III) the prisoner is unlikely to recidivate; and
       ``(IV) the transfer of the prisoner to prerelease custody 
     is otherwise appropriate.
       ``(2) Types of prerelease custody.--A prisoner shall be 
     placed in prerelease custody as follows:
       ``(A) Home confinement.--
       ``(i) In general.--A prisoner placed in prerelease custody 
     pursuant to this subsection who is placed in home confinement 
     shall--

       ``(I) be subject to 24-hour electronic monitoring that 
     enables the prompt identification of the prisoner, location, 
     and time, in the case of any violation of subclause (II);
       ``(II) remain in the prisoner's residence, except that the 
     prisoner may leave the prisoner's home in order to, subject 
     to the approval of the Director of the Bureau of Prisons--

       ``(aa) perform a job or job-related activities, including 
     an apprenticeship, or participate in job-seeking activities;
       ``(bb) participate in evidence-based recidivism reduction 
     programming or productive activities assigned by the System, 
     or similar activities;
       ``(cc) perform community service;
       ``(dd) participate in crime victim restoration activities;
       ``(ee) receive medical treatment; or
       ``(ff) attend religious activities; and

       ``(III) comply with such other conditions as the Director 
     determines appropriate.

       ``(ii) Alternate means of monitoring.--If the electronic 
     monitoring of a prisoner described in clause (i)(I) is 
     infeasible for technical or religious reasons, the Director 
     of the Bureau of Prisons may use alternative means of 
     monitoring a prisoner placed in home confinement that the 
     Director determines are as effective or more effective than 
     the electronic monitoring described in clause (i)(I).
       ``(iii) Modifications.--The Director of the Bureau of 
     Prisons may modify the conditions described in clause (i) if 
     the Director determines that a compelling reason exists to do 
     so, and that the prisoner has demonstrated exemplary 
     compliance with such conditions.
       ``(iv) Duration.--Except as provided in paragraph (4), a 
     prisoner who is placed in home confinement shall remain in 
     home confinement until the prisoner has served not less than 
     85 percent of the prisoner's imposed term of imprisonment.
       ``(B) Residential reentry center.--A prisoner placed in 
     prerelease custody pursuant to this subsection who is placed 
     at a residential reentry center shall be subject to such 
     conditions as the Director of the Bureau of Prisons 
     determines appropriate.
       ``(3) Determination of conditions.--In determining 
     appropriate conditions for prisoners placed in prerelease 
     custody pursuant to this subsection, the Director of the 
     Bureau of Prisons shall, to the extent practicable, provide 
     that increasingly less restrictive conditions shall be 
     imposed on prisoners who demonstrate continued compliance 
     with the conditions of such prerelease custody, so as to most 
     effectively prepare such prisoners for reentry.
       ``(4) Violations of conditions.--If a prisoner violates a 
     condition of the prisoner's prerelease custody, the Director 
     of the Bureau of Prisons may impose such additional 
     conditions on the prisoner's prerelease custody as the 
     Director of the Bureau of Prisons determines appropriate, or 
     revoke the prisoner's prerelease custody and require the 
     prisoner to serve the remainder of the term of imprisonment 
     to which the prisoner was sentenced, or any portion thereof, 
     in prison.
       ``(5) Issuance of guidelines.--The Attorney General, in 
     consultation with the Assistant Director for the Office of 
     Probation and Pretrial Services, shall issue guidelines, for 
     use by the Bureau of Prisons in determining--
       ``(A) the appropriate type of prerelease custody and level 
     of supervision for a prisoner placed on prerelease custody 
     pursuant to this subsection; and
       ``(B) consequences for a violation of a condition of such 
     prerelease custody by such a prisoner, including a return to 
     prison and a reassessment of evidence-based recidivism risk 
     level under the System.
       ``(6) Agreements with united states probation and pretrial 
     services.--The Director of the Bureau of Prisons shall, to 
     the greatest extent practicable, enter into agreements with 
     United States Probation and Pretrial Services to supervise 
     prisoners placed in home confinement or community supervision 
     under this subsection. Such agreements shall--
       ``(A) authorize United States Probation and Pretrial 
     Services to exercise the authority granted to the Director 
     pursuant to paragraphs (3) and (4); and
       ``(B) take into account the resource requirements of United 
     States Probation and Pretrial Services as a result of the 
     transfer of Bureau of Prisons prisoners to prerelease 
     custody.
       ``(7) Assistance.--United States Probation and Pretrial 
     Services shall, to the greatest extent practicable, offer 
     assistance to any prisoner not under its supervision during 
     prerelease custody under this subsection.
       ``(8) Mentoring services.--Any prerelease custody into 
     which a prisoner is placed under this subsection may not 
     include a condition prohibiting the prisoner from receiving 
     mentoring services from a person who provided such services 
     to the prisoner while the prisoner was incarcerated, except 
     that the warden of the facility at which the prisoner was 
     incarcerated may waive the requirement under this paragraph 
     if the warden finds that the provision of such services would 
     pose a significant security risk to the prisoner, persons who 
     provide such services, or any other person. The warden shall 
     provide written notice of any such waiver to the person 
     providing mentoring services and to the prisoner.
       ``(9) Time limits inapplicable.--The time limits under 
     subsections (b) and (c) shall not apply to prerelease custody 
     under this subsection.''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection 
     shall take effect beginning on the date that the Attorney 
     General completes and releases the risk and needs assessment 
     system under subchapter D of chapter 229 of title 18, United 
     States Code.
       (3) Applicability.--The amendments made by this subsection 
     shall apply with respect to offenses committed before, on, or 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, except that such 
     amendments shall not apply with respect to offenses committed 
     before November 1, 1987.

     SEC. 103. GAO REPORT.

       Not later than 2 years after the Director of the Bureau of 
     Prisons implements the risk and needs assessment system under 
     section 3621 of title 18, United States Code, and every 2 
     years thereafter, the Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall conduct an audit of the use of the risk and 
     needs assessment system at Bureau of Prisons facilities. The 
     audit shall include analysis of the following:
       (1) Whether inmates are being assessed under the risk and 
     needs assessment system with the frequency required under 
     such section 3621.
       (2) Whether the Bureau of Prisons is able to offer 
     recidivism reduction programs and productive activities (as 
     such terms are defined in section 3635 of title 18, United 
     States Code).
       (3) Whether the Bureau of Prisons is offering the type, 
     amount, and intensity of recidivism reduction programs and 
     productive activities for prisoners to earn the maximum 
     amount of time credits for which they are eligible.
       (4) Whether the Attorney General is carrying out the duties 
     under section 3631(b) of title 18, United States Code.
       (5) Whether officers and employees of the Bureau of Prisons 
     are receiving the training described in section 3236(f) of 
     title 18, United States Code.
       (6) Whether the Bureau of Prisons offers work assignments 
     to all prisoners who might benefit from such an assignment.
       (7) Whether the Bureau of Prisons transfers prisoners to 
     prerelease custody as soon as they are eligible for such a 
     transfer under section 3624(g) of title 18, United States 
     Code.
       (8) The rates of recidivism among similarly classified 
     prisoners to identify any unwarranted disparities, including 
     disparities

[[Page H4307]]

     among similarly classified prisoners of different demographic 
     groups, in such rates.

     SEC. 104. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this title $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
     2019 through 2023. Of the amount appropriated under this 
     subsection, 80 percent shall be reserved for use by the 
     Director of the Bureau of Prisons to implement the system 
     under section 102 and the amendments made by that section.
       (b) Savings.--It is the sense of Congress that any savings 
     associated with reductions in recidivism that result from 
     this title should be reinvested--
       (1) into evidence-based recidivism reduction programs 
     offered by the Bureau of Prisons; and
       (2) into ensuring eligible prisoners have access to such 
     programs and productive activities offered by the Bureau of 
     Prisons.

     SEC. 105. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

       Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, 
     may be construed to provide authority to place a prisoner in 
     prerelease custody who is serving a term of imprisonment 
     pursuant to a conviction for an offense under the laws of one 
     of the 50 States, or of a territory or possession of the 
     United States.

     SEC. 106. FAITH-BASED CONSIDERATIONS.

       In considering any program, treatment, regimen, group, 
     company, charity, person or entity of any kind under any 
     provision of this Act or the amendments made by this Act, the 
     fact that it may be or is faith-based may not be a basis for 
     any discrimination against it in any manner or for any 
     purpose.

          TITLE II--BUREAU OF PRISONS SECURE FIREARMS STORAGE

     SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Lieutenant Osvaldo 
     Albarati Correctional Officer Self-Protection Act of 2018''.

     SEC. 202. SECURE FIREARMS STORAGE.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 303 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 4050. Secure firearms storage

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section--
       ``(1) the term `employee' means a qualified law enforcement 
     officer employed by the Bureau of Prisons; and
       ``(2) the terms `firearm' and `qualified law enforcement 
     officer' have the meanings given those terms under section 
     926B.
       ``(b) Secure Firearms Storage.--The Director of the Bureau 
     of Prisons shall ensure that each chief executive officer of 
     a Federal penal or correctional institution--
       ``(1)(A) provides a secure storage area located outside of 
     the secure perimeter of the institution for employees to 
     store firearms; or
       ``(B) allows employees to store firearms in a vehicle 
     lockbox approved by the Director of the Bureau of Prisons; 
     and
       ``(2) notwithstanding any other provision of law, allows 
     employees to carry concealed firearms on the premises outside 
     of the secure perimeter of the institution.''.
       (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of 
     sections for chapter 303 of title 18, United States Code, as 
     amended by this Act, is further amended by adding at the end 
     the following:

``4050. Secure firearms storage.''.

         TITLE III--RESTRAINTS ON PREGNANT PRISONERS PROHIBITED

     SEC. 301. USE OF RESTRAINTS ON PRISONERS DURING THE PERIOD OF 
                   PREGNANCY AND POSTPARTUM RECOVERY PROHIBITED.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 317 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 4321 the 
     following:

     ``Sec. 4322. Use of restraints on prisoners during the period 
       of pregnancy, labor, and postpartum recovery prohibited

       ``(a) Prohibition.--Except as provided in subsection (b), 
     beginning on the date on which pregnancy is confirmed by a 
     healthcare professional, and ending at the conclusion of 
     postpartum recovery, a prisoner in the custody of the Bureau 
     of Prisons, or in the custody of the United States Marshals 
     Service pursuant to section 4086, shall not be placed in 
     restraints.
       ``(b) Exceptions.--
       ``(1) In general.--The prohibition under subsection (a) 
     shall not apply if--
       ``(A) an appropriate corrections official, or a United 
     States marshal, as applicable, makes a determination that the 
     prisoner--
       ``(i) is an immediate and credible flight risk that cannot 
     reasonably be prevented by other means; or
       ``(ii) poses an immediate and serious threat of harm to 
     herself or others that cannot reasonably be prevented by 
     other means; or
       ``(B) a healthcare professional responsible for the health 
     and safety of the prisoner determines that the use of 
     restraints is appropriate for the medical safety of the 
     prisoner.
       ``(2) Least restrictive restraints.--In the case that 
     restraints are used pursuant to an exception under paragraph 
     (1), only the least restrictive restraints necessary to 
     prevent the harm or risk of escape described in paragraph (1) 
     may be used.
       ``(3) Application.--
       ``(A) In general.--The exceptions under paragraph (1) may 
     not be applied--
       ``(i) to place restraints around the ankles, legs, or waist 
     of a prisoner;
       ``(ii) to restrain a prisoner's hands behind her back;
       ``(iii) to restrain a prisoner using four-point restraints; 
     or
       ``(iv) to attach a prisoner to another prisoner.
       ``(B) Medical request.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), upon 
     the request of a healthcare professional who is responsible 
     for the health and safety of a prisoner, a corrections 
     official or United States marshal, as applicable, shall 
     refrain from using restraints on the prisoner or remove 
     restraints used on the prisoner.
       ``(c) Reports.--
       ``(1) Report to the director and healthcare professional.--
     If a corrections official or United States marshal uses 
     restraints on a prisoner under subsection (b)(1), that 
     official or marshal shall submit, not later than 30 days 
     after placing the prisoner in restraints, to the Director of 
     the Bureau of Prisons or the Director of the United States 
     Marshals Service, as applicable, and to the healthcare 
     professional responsible for the health and safety of the 
     prisoner, a written report which describes the facts and 
     circumstances surrounding the use of restraints, and 
     includes--
       ``(A) the reasoning upon which the determination to use 
     restraints was made;
       ``(B) the details of the use of restraints, including the 
     type of restraints used and length of time during which 
     restraints were used; and
       ``(C) any resulting physical effects on the prisoner 
     observed by or known to the corrections official or United 
     States marshal, as applicable.
       ``(2) Supplemental report to the director.--Upon receipt of 
     a report under subsection (c)(1), the healthcare professional 
     responsible for the health and safety of the prisoner may 
     submit to the Director such information as the healthcare 
     professional determines is relevant to the use of restraints 
     on the prisoner.
       ``(3) Report to judiciary committees.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Director 
     of the Bureau of Prisons and the Director of the United 
     States Marshals Service shall each submit to the Judiciary 
     Committee of the Senate and of the House of Representatives a 
     report that certifies compliance with this section and 
     includes the information required to be reported under 
     paragraph (1).
       ``(B) Personally identifiable information.--The report 
     under this paragraph shall not contain any personally 
     identifiable information of any prisoner.
       ``(d) Notice.--Not later than 48 hours after the 
     confirmation of a prisoner's pregnancy by a healthcare 
     professional, that prisoner shall be notified by an 
     appropriate healthcare professional, corrections official, or 
     United States marshal, as applicable, of the restrictions on 
     the use of restraints under this section.
       ``(e) Violation Reporting Process.--The Director of the 
     Bureau of Prisons, in consultation with the Director of the 
     United States Marshals Service, shall establish a process 
     through which a prisoner may report a violation of this 
     section.
       ``(f) Training.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Director of the Bureau of Prisons 
     and the Director of the United States Marshals Service shall 
     each develop training guidelines regarding the use of 
     restraints on female prisoners during the period of 
     pregnancy, labor, and postpartum recovery, and shall 
     incorporate such guidelines into appropriate training 
     programs. Such training guidelines shall include--
       ``(A) how to identify certain symptoms of pregnancy that 
     require immediate referral to a healthcare professional;
       ``(B) circumstances under which the exceptions under 
     subsection (b) would apply;
       ``(C) in the case that an exception under subsection (b) 
     applies, how to apply restraints in a way that does not harm 
     the prisoner, the fetus, or the neonate;
       ``(D) the information required to be reported under 
     subsection (c); and
       ``(E) the right of a healthcare professional to request 
     that restraints not be used, and the requirement under 
     subsection (b)(3)(B) to comply with such a request.
       ``(2) Development of guidelines.--In developing the 
     guidelines required by paragraph (1), the Directors shall 
     each consult with healthcare professionals with expertise in 
     caring for women during the period of pregnancy and 
     postpartum recovery.
       ``(g) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
       ``(1) The term `postpartum recovery' means the twelve-week 
     period, or longer as determined by the healthcare 
     professional responsible for the health and safety of the 
     prisoner, following delivery, and shall include the entire 
     period that the prisoner is in the hospital or infirmary.
       ``(2) The term `restraints' means any physical or 
     mechanical device used to control the movement of a 
     prisoner's body, limbs, or both.
       ``(3) The term `prisoner' means a person who has been 
     sentenced to a term of imprisonment pursuant to a conviction 
     for a Federal criminal offense, or a person in the custody of 
     the Bureau of Prisons, including a person in a Bureau of 
     Prisons contracted facility.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 317 of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding after the item relating to section 4321 the 
     following:

``4322. Use of restraints on prisoners during the period of pregnancy, 
              labor, and postpartum recovery prohibited.''.

[[Page H4308]]

  


                TITLE IV--MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL JUSTICE

     SEC. 401. PLACEMENT OF PRISONERS CLOSE TO FAMILIES.

       Subsection (b) of section 3621 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking ``shall designate the place of the 
     prisoner's imprisonment.'' and inserting ``shall designate 
     the place of the prisoner's imprisonment, and shall, subject 
     to bed availability, the prisoner's security designation, the 
     prisoner's programmatic needs, the prisoner's mental and 
     medical health needs, any request made by the prisoner 
     related to faith-based needs, recommendations of the 
     sentencing court, and other security concerns of the Bureau 
     of Prisons, place the prisoner in a facility as close as 
     practicable to the prisoner's primary residence, and to the 
     extent practicable, in a facility within 500 driving miles of 
     that residence. The Bureau shall, subject to consideration of 
     the factors described in the preceding sentence and the 
     prisoner's preference for staying at his or her current 
     facility or being transferred, transfer prisoners to 
     facilities that are closer to the prisoner's primary 
     residence even if the prisoner is already in a facility 
     within 500 driving miles of that residence.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following: ``Notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law, a designation of a place of 
     imprisonment under this subsection is not reviewable by any 
     court.''.

     SEC. 402. HOME CONFINEMENT FOR LOW RISK PRISONERS.

       Section 3624(c)(2) of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following: ``The Bureau of 
     Prisons shall, to the extent practicable, place prisoners 
     with lower risk levels and lower needs on home confinement 
     for the maximum amount of time permitted under this 
     paragraph.''.

     SEC. 403. FEDERAL PRISONER REENTRY INITIATIVE 
                   REAUTHORIZATION; MODIFICATION OF IMPOSED TERM 
                   OF IMPRISONMENT.

       (a) Federal Prisoner Reentry Initiative Reauthorization.--
     Section 231(g) of the Second Chance Act of 2007 (34 U.S.C. 
     60541(g)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by inserting ``and eligible terminally ill offenders'' 
     after ``elderly offenders'' each place the term appears; and
       (B) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``a Bureau of Prisons 
     facility'' and inserting ``Bureau of Prisons facilities'';
       (C) in subparagraph (B)--
       (i) by striking ``the Bureau of Prisons facility'' and 
     inserting ``Bureau of Prisons facilities''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``, upon written request from either the 
     Bureau of Prisons or an eligible elderly offender or eligible 
     terminally ill offender'' after ``to home detention''; and
       (D) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``the Bureau of 
     Prisons facility'' and inserting ``Bureau of Prisons 
     facilities'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``or eligible terminally 
     ill offender'' after ``elderly offender'';
       (3) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by striking ``at least one Bureau of Prisons facility'' 
     and inserting ``Bureau of Prisons facilities''; and
       (B) by striking ``and shall be carried out during fiscal 
     years 2009 and 2010'' and inserting ``and shall be carried 
     out during fiscal years 2019 through 2022'';
       (4) in paragraph (4)--
       (A) by inserting ``or eligible terminally ill offender'' 
     after ``each eligible elderly offender''; and
       (B) by inserting ``and eligible terminally ill offenders'' 
     after ``eligible elderly offenders''; and
       (5) in paragraph (5)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) in clause (i), striking ``65 years of age'' and 
     inserting ``60 years of age''; and
       (ii) in clause (ii)--

       (I) by striking ``the greater of 10 years or''; and
       (II) by striking ``75 percent'' and inserting ``\2/3\''; 
     and

       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) Eligible terminally ill offender.--The term `eligible 
     terminally ill offender' means an offender in the custody of 
     the Bureau of Prisons who--
       ``(i) is serving a term of imprisonment based on conviction 
     for an offense or offenses that do not include any crime of 
     violence (as defined in section 16(a) of title 18, United 
     States Code), sex offense (as defined in section 111(5) of 
     the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (34 U.S.C. 
     20911(5))), offense described in section 2332b(g)(5)(B) of 
     title 18, United States Code, or offense under chapter 37 of 
     title 18, United States Code;
       ``(ii) satisfies the criteria specified in clauses (iii) 
     through (vii) of subparagraph (A); and
       ``(iii) has been determined by a medical doctor approved by 
     the Bureau of Prisons to be--

       ``(I) in need of care at a nursing home, intermediate care 
     facility, or assisted living facility, as those terms are 
     defined in section 232 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 
     1715w); or
       ``(II) diagnosed with a terminal illness.''.

       (b) Increasing the Use and Transparency of Compassionate 
     Release.--Section 3582 of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)(1)(A), in the matter preceding clause 
     (i), by inserting after ``Bureau of Prisons,'' the following: 
     ``or upon motion of the defendant after the defendant has 
     fully exhausted all administrative rights to appeal a failure 
     of the Bureau of Prisons to bring a motion on the defendant's 
     behalf or the lapse of 30 days from the receipt of such a 
     request by the warden of the defendant's facility, whichever 
     is earlier,'';
       (2) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and
       (3) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
       ``(d) Notification Requirements.--
       ``(1) Terminal illness defined.--In this subsection, the 
     term `terminal illness' means a disease or condition with an 
     end-of-life trajectory.
       ``(2) Notification.--The Bureau of Prisons shall, subject 
     to any applicable confidentiality requirements--
       ``(A) in the case of a defendant diagnosed with a terminal 
     illness--
       ``(i) not later than 72 hours after the diagnosis notify 
     the defendant's attorney, partner, and family members of the 
     defendant's condition and inform the defendant's attorney, 
     partner, and family members that they may prepare and submit 
     on the defendant's behalf a request for a sentence reduction 
     pursuant to subsection (c)(1)(A);
       ``(ii) not later than 7 days after the date of the 
     diagnosis, provide the defendant's partner and family members 
     (including extended family) with an opportunity to visit the 
     defendant in person;
       ``(iii) upon request from the defendant or his attorney, 
     partner, or a family member, ensure that Bureau of Prisons 
     employees assist the defendant in the preparation, drafting, 
     and submission of a request for a sentence reduction pursuant 
     to subsection (c)(1)(A); and
       ``(iv) not later than 14 days of receipt of a request for a 
     sentence reduction submitted on the defendant's behalf by the 
     defendant or the defendant's attorney, partner, or family 
     member, process the request;
       ``(B) in the case of a defendant who is physically or 
     mentally unable to submit a request for a sentence reduction 
     pursuant to subsection (c)(1)(A)--
       ``(i) inform the defendant's attorney, partner, and family 
     members that they may prepare and submit on the defendant's 
     behalf a request for a sentence reduction pursuant to 
     subsection (c)(1)(A);
       ``(ii) accept and process a request for sentence reduction 
     that has been prepared and submitted on the defendant's 
     behalf by the defendant's attorney, partner, or family member 
     under clause (i); and
       ``(iii) upon request from the defendant or his attorney, 
     partner, or family member, ensure that Bureau of Prisons 
     employees assist the defendant in the preparation, drafting, 
     and submission of a request for a sentence reduction pursuant 
     to subsection (c)(1)(A); and
       ``(C) ensure that all Bureau of Prisons facilities 
     regularly and visibly post, including in prisoner handbooks, 
     staff training materials, and facility law libraries and 
     medical and hospice facilities, and make available to 
     prisoners upon demand, notice of--
       ``(i) a defendant's ability to request a sentence reduction 
     pursuant to subsection (c)(1)(A);
       ``(ii) the procedures and timelines for initiating and 
     resolving requests described in clause (i); and
       ``(iii) the right to appeal a denial of a request described 
     in clause (i) after all administrative rights to appeal 
     within the Bureau of Prisons have been exhausted.
       ``(3) Annual report.--Not later than 1 year after the date 
     of enactment of this subsection, and once every year 
     thereafter, the Director of the Bureau of Prisons shall 
     submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and 
     the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of 
     Representatives a report on requests for sentence reductions 
     pursuant to subsection (c)(1)(A), which shall include a 
     description of, for the previous year--
       ``(A) the number of prisoners granted and denied sentence 
     reductions, categorized by the criteria relied on as the 
     grounds for a reduction in sentence;
       ``(B) the number of requests initiated by or on behalf of 
     prisoners, categorized by the criteria relied on as the 
     grounds for a reduction in sentence;
       ``(C) the number of requests which Bureau of Prisons 
     employees assisted prisoners in drafting, preparing, or 
     submitting, categorized by the criteria relied on as the 
     grounds for a reduction in sentence, and the final decision 
     made in each request;
       ``(D) the number of requests which attorneys, partners, or 
     family members submitted on a defendant's behalf, categorized 
     by the criteria relied on as the grounds for a reduction in 
     sentence, and the final decision made in each request;
       ``(E) the number of requests approved by the Director of 
     the Bureau of Prisons, categorized by the criteria relied on 
     as the grounds for a reduction in sentence;
       ``(F) the number of requests denied by the Director of the 
     Bureau of Prisons and the reasons given for each denial, 
     categorized by the criteria relied on as the grounds for a 
     reduction in sentence;
       ``(G) for each request, the time elapsed between the date 
     the request was received by the warden and the final 
     decision, categorized by the criteria relied on as the 
     grounds for a reduction in sentence;
       ``(H) for each request, the number of prisoners who died 
     while their request was pending and, for each, the amount of 
     time that had elapsed between the date the request was 
     received by the Bureau of Prisons, categorized by the 
     criteria relied on as the grounds for a reduction in 
     sentence;

[[Page H4309]]

       ``(I) the number of Bureau of Prisons notifications to 
     attorneys, partners, and family members of their right to 
     visit a terminally ill defendant as required under paragraph 
     (2)(A)(ii) and, for each, whether a visit occurred and how 
     much time elapsed between the notification and the visit;
       ``(J) the number of visits to terminally ill prisoners that 
     were denied by the Bureau of Prisons due to security or other 
     concerns, and the reasons given for each denial; and
       ``(K) the number of motions filed by defendants with the 
     court after all administrative rights to appeal a denial of a 
     sentence reduction had been exhausted, the outcome of each 
     motion, and the time that had elapsed between the date the 
     request was first received by the Bureau of Prisons and the 
     date the defendant filed the motion with the court.''.

     SEC. 404. IDENTIFICATION FOR RETURNING CITIZENS.

       (a) Identification and Release Assistance for Federal 
     Prisoners.--Section 231(b) of the Second Chance Act of 2007 
     (34 U.S.C. 60541(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by striking ``(including'' and inserting ``prior to 
     release from a term of imprisonment in a Federal prison or if 
     the individual was not sentenced to a term of imprisonment in 
     a Federal prison, prior to release from a sentence to a term 
     in community confinement, including''; and
       (B) by striking ``or birth certificate) prior to release'' 
     and inserting ``and a birth certificate''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Definition.--In this subsection, the term `community 
     confinement' means residence in a community treatment center, 
     halfway house, restitution center, mental health facility, 
     alcohol or drug rehabilitation center, or other community 
     facility.''.
       (b) Duties of the Bureau of Prisons.--Section 4042(a) of 
     title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (D) and (E) as paragraphs 
     (6) and (7), respectively;
       (2) in paragraph (6) (as so redesignated)--
       (A) in clause (i)--
       (i) by striking ``Social Security Cards,''; and
       (ii) by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) by redesignating clause (ii) as clause (iii);
       (C) by inserting after clause (i) the following:
       ``(ii) obtain identification, including a social security 
     card, driver's license or other official photo 
     identification, and a birth certificate; and'';
       (D) in clause (iii) (as so redesignated), by inserting 
     after ``prior to release'' the following: ``from a sentence 
     to a term of imprisonment in a Federal prison or if the 
     individual was not sentenced to a term of imprisonment in a 
     Federal prison, prior to release from a sentence to a term of 
     community confinement''; and
       (E) by redesignating clauses (i), (ii), and (iii) (as so 
     amended) as subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), respectively; 
     and
       (3) in paragraph (7) (as so redesignated), by redesignating 
     clauses (i) through (vii) as subparagraphs (A) through (G), 
     respectively.

     SEC. 405. EXPANDING INMATE EMPLOYMENT THROUGH FEDERAL PRISON 
                   INDUSTRIES.

       (a) New Market Authorizations.--Chapter 307 of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 
     4129 the following:

     ``Sec. 4130. Additional markets

       ``(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, Federal Prison Industries may sell products to--
       ``(1) public entities for use in penal or correctional 
     institutions;
       ``(2) public entities for use in disaster relief or 
     emergency response;
       ``(3) the government of the District of Columbia; and
       ``(4) any organization described in section 501(c)(3), 
     (c)(4), or (d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that is 
     exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of such Code.
       ``(b) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) The term `public entity' means a State, a subdivision 
     of a State, an Indian tribe, and an agency or governmental 
     corporation or business of any of the foregoing.
       ``(2) The term `State' means a State, the District of 
     Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American 
     Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the United States 
     Virgin Islands.''.
       (b) Technical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 
     307 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
     after the item relating to section 4129 the following:

``4130. Additional markets.''.
       (c) Deferred Compensation.--Section 4126(c)(4) of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after 
     ``operations,'' the following: ``not less than 15 percent of 
     such compensation for any inmate shall be reserved in the 
     fund or a separate account and made available to assist the 
     inmate with costs associated with release from prison,''.

     SEC. 406. DE-ESCALATION TRAINING.

       Beginning not later than 1 year after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Director of the Bureau of Prisons 
     shall incorporate into training programs provided to officers 
     and employees of the Bureau of Prisons (including officers 
     and employees of an organization with which the Bureau of 
     Prisons has a contract to provide services relating to 
     imprisonment) specialized and comprehensive training in 
     procedures to--
       (1) de-escalate encounters between a law enforcement 
     officer or an officer or employee of the Bureau of Prisons, 
     and a civilian or a prisoner (as such term is defined in 
     section 106 of this Act); and
       (2) identify and appropriately respond to incidents that 
     involve the unique needs of individuals who have a mental 
     illness or cognitive deficit.

     SEC. 407. EVIDENCE-BASED TREATMENT FOR OPIOID AND HEROIN 
                   ABUSE.

       (a) Report on Evidence-based Treatment for Opioid and 
     Heroin Abuse.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Director of the Bureau of Prisons 
     shall submit to the Committees on the Judiciary and the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and of the House 
     of Representatives a report assessing the availability of and 
     the capacity of the Bureau of Prisons to treat heroin and 
     opioid abuse through evidence-based programs, including 
     medication-assisted treatment where appropriate. In preparing 
     the report, the Director shall consider medication-assisted 
     treatment as a strategy to assist in treatment where 
     appropriate and not as a replacement for holistic and other 
     drug-free approaches. The report shall include a description 
     of plans to expand access to evidence-based treatment for 
     heroin and opioid abuse for prisoners, including access to 
     medication-assisted treatment in appropriate cases. Following 
     submission, the Director shall take steps to implement these 
     plans.
       (b) Report on the Availability of Medication-Assisted 
     Treatment for Opioid and Heroin Abuse, and Implementation 
     Thereof.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Director of the Administrative 
     Office of the United States Courts shall submit to the 
     Committees on the Judiciary and the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and of the House of 
     Representatives a report assessing the availability of and 
     capacity for the provision of medication-assisted treatment 
     for opioid and heroin abuse by treatment-service providers 
     serving prisoners who are serving a term of supervised 
     release, and including a description of plans to expand 
     access to medication-assisted treatment for heroin and opioid 
     abuse whenever appropriate among prisoners under supervised 
     release. Following submission, the Director will take steps 
     to implement these plans.

     SEC. 408. PILOT PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--The Bureau of Prisons shall establish each 
     of the following pilot programs for 5 years, in at least 20 
     facilities:
       (1) Mentorship for youth.--A program to pair youth with 
     volunteers from faith-based or community organizations, which 
     may include formerly incarcerated offenders, that have 
     relevant experience or expertise in mentoring, and a 
     willingness to serve as a mentor in such a capacity.
       (2) Service to abandoned, rescued, or otherwise vulnerable 
     animals.--A program to equip prisoners with the skills to 
     provide training and therapy to animals seized by Federal law 
     enforcement under asset forfeiture authority and to 
     organizations that provide shelter and similar services to 
     abandoned, rescued, or otherwise vulnerable animals.
       (b) Reporting Requirement.--Not later than one year after 
     the conclusion of the pilot programs, the Attorney General 
     shall report to Congress on the results of the pilot programs 
     under this section. Such report shall include cost savings, 
     numbers of participants, and information about recidivism 
     rates among participants.
       (c) Definition.--In this title, the term ``youth'' means a 
     prisoner (as such term is defined in section 106) who was 21 
     years of age or younger at the time of the commission or 
     alleged commission of the criminal offense for which the 
     individual is being prosecuted or serving a term of 
     imprisonment, as the case may be.

     SEC. 409. ENSURING SUPERVISION OF RELEASED SEXUALLY DANGEROUS 
                   PERSONS.

       (a) Probation Officers.--Section 3603 of title 18, United 
     States Code, is amended in paragraph (8)(A) by striking ``or 
     4246'' and inserting ``, 4246, or 4248''.
       (b) Pretrial Services Officers.--Section 3154 of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended in paragraph (12)(A) by 
     striking ``or 4246'' and inserting ``, 4246, or 4248''.

     SEC. 410. DATA COLLECTION.

       (a) National Prisoner Statistics Program.--Beginning not 
     later than one year after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, and annually thereafter, pursuant to the authority under 
     section 302 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act 
     of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3732), the Director of the Bureau of 
     Justice Statistics, with information that shall be provided 
     by the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, shall include in 
     the National Prisoner Statistics Program the following:
       (1) The number of prisoners (as such term is defined in 
     section 106 of this Act) who are veterans of the Armed Forces 
     of the United States.
       (2) The number of prisoners who have been placed in 
     solitary confinement at any time during the previous year.
       (3) The number of female prisoners known by the Bureau of 
     Prisons to be pregnant, as well as the outcomes of such 
     pregnancies, including information on pregnancies that result 
     in live-birth, still-birth, miscarriage, abortion, ectopic 
     pregnancy, maternal death, neonatal death, and preterm birth.
       (4) The numbers of prisoners who volunteered to participate 
     in a substance abuse

[[Page H4310]]

     treatment program, and the number of prisoners who have 
     participated in such a program.
       (5) The number of prisoners provided medication-assisted 
     treatment with medication approved by the Food and Drug 
     Administration while in custody in order to treat substance 
     use disorder.
       (6) The number of prisoners who were receiving medication-
     assisted treatment with medication approved by the Food and 
     Drug Administration prior to the commencement of their term 
     of imprisonment.
       (7) The number of prisoners who are the parent or guardian 
     of a minor child.
       (8) The numbers of prisoners who are single, married, or 
     otherwise in a committed relationship.
       (9) The number of prisoners who have not achieved a GED, 
     high school diploma, or equivalent prior to entering prison.
       (10) The number of prisoners who, during the previous year, 
     received their GED or other equivalent certificate while 
     incarcerated.
       (11) The numbers of prisoners for whom English is a second 
     language.
       (12) The number of incidents, during the previous year, in 
     which restraints were used on a female prisoner during 
     pregnancy, labor, or postpartum recovery, as well as 
     information relating to the type of restraints used, and the 
     circumstances under which each incident occurred.
       (13) The vacancy rate for medical and healthcare staff 
     positions, and average length of such a vacancy.
       (14) The number of facilities that operated, at any time 
     during the previous year, without at least one clinical 
     nurse, certified paramedic, or licensed physician on-site.
       (15) The number of facilities that during the previous year 
     were accredited by the American Correctional Association.
       (16) The number and type of recidivism reduction 
     partnerships described in section 3621(h)(5) of title 18, 
     United States Code, entered into by each facility.
       (17) The number of facilities with remote learning 
     capabilities.
       (18) The number of facilities that offer prisoners video 
     conferencing.
       (19) Any changes in costs related to legal phone calls and 
     visits following implementation of section 403 of this Act.
       (20) The number of aliens in prison during the previous 
     year.
       (21) For each Bureau of Prisons facility, the total number 
     of violations that resulted in reductions in rewards, 
     incentives, or time credits, the number of such violations 
     for each category of violation, and the demographic breakdown 
     of the prisoners who have received such reductions.
       (22) The number of assaults on Bureau of Prisons staff by 
     prisoners and the number of criminal prosecutions of 
     prisoners for assaulting Bureau of Prisons staff.
       (23) The capacity of each recidivism reduction program and 
     productive activity to accommodate eligible inmates at each 
     Bureau of Prisons facility.
       (24) The number of volunteers who were certified to 
     volunteer in a Bureau of Prisons facility, broken down by 
     level (level I and level II), and by each Bureau of Prisons 
     facility.
       (25) The number of prisoners enrolled in recidivism 
     reduction programs and productive activities at each Bureau 
     of Prisons facility, broken down by risk level and by 
     program, and the number of those enrolled prisoners who 
     successfully completed each program.
       (26) The breakdown of prisoners classified at each risk 
     level by demographic characteristics, including age, sex, 
     race, and the length of the sentence imposed.
       (b) Report to Judiciary Committees.--Beginning not later 
     than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     and annually thereafter for a period of 7 years, the Director 
     of the Bureau of Justice Statistics shall submit a report 
     containing the information described in paragraphs (1) 
     through (26) of subsection (a) to the Committees on the 
     Judiciary of the House of Representatives and of the Senate.

     SEC. 411. HEALTHCARE PRODUCTS.

       (a) Availability.--The Director of the Bureau of Prisons 
     shall make the healthcare products described in subsection 
     (c) available to prisoners for free, in a quantity that is 
     appropriate to the healthcare needs of each prisoner.
       (b) Quality Products.--The Director shall ensure that the 
     healthcare products provided under this section conform with 
     applicable industry standards.
       (c) Products.--The healthcare products described in this 
     subsection are tampons and sanitary napkins.

     SEC. 412. PRISON RAPE ELIMINATION STANDARDS AUDITORS.

       Section 8(e)(8) of the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 
     (34 U.S.C. 30307(e)(8)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(8) Standards for auditors.--
       ``(A) In general.--
       ``(i) Background checks for auditors.--An individual 
     seeking certification by the Department of Justice to serve 
     as an auditor of prison compliance with the national 
     standards described in subsection (a) shall, upon request, 
     submit fingerprints in the manner determined by the Attorney 
     General for criminal history record checks of the applicable 
     State and Federal Bureau of Investigation repositories.
       ``(ii) Certification agreements.--Each auditor certified 
     under this paragraph shall sign a certification agreement 
     that includes the provisions of, or provisions that are 
     substantially similar to, the Bureau of Justice Assistance's 
     Auditor Certification Agreement in use in April 2018.
       ``(iii) Auditor evaluation.--The PREA Management Office of 
     the Bureau of Justice Assistance shall evaluate all auditors 
     based on the criteria contained in the certification 
     agreement. In the case that an auditor fails to comply with a 
     certification agreement or to conduct audits in accordance 
     with the PREA Auditor Handbook, audit methodology, and 
     instrument approved by the PREA Management Office, the Office 
     may take remedial or disciplinary action, as appropriate, 
     including decertifying the auditor in accordance with 
     subparagraph (B).
       ``(B) Auditor decertification.--
       ``(i) In general.--The PREA Management Office may suspend 
     an auditor's certification during an evaluation of an 
     auditor's performance under subparagraph (A)(iii). The PREA 
     Management Office shall promptly publish the names of 
     auditors who have been decertified, and the reason for 
     decertification. Auditors who have been decertified or are on 
     suspension may not participate in audits described in 
     subsection (a), including as an agent of a certified auditor.
       ``(ii) Notification.--In the case that an auditor is 
     decertified, the PREA Management Office shall inform each 
     facility or agency at which the auditor performed an audit 
     during the relevant three-year audit cycle, and may recommend 
     that the agency repeat any affected audits, if appropriate.
       ``(C) Audit assignments.--The PREA Management Office shall 
     establish a system, to be administered by the Office, for 
     assigning certified auditors to Federal, State, and local 
     facilities.
       ``(D) Disclosure of documentation.--The Director of the 
     Bureau of Prisons shall comply with each request for 
     documentation necessary to conduct an audit under subsection 
     (a), which is made by a certified auditor in accordance with 
     the provisions of the certification agreement described in 
     subparagraph (A)(ii). The Director of the Bureau of Prisons 
     may require an auditor to sign a confidentiality agreement or 
     other agreement designed to address the auditor's use of 
     personally identifiable information, except that such an 
     agreement may not limit an auditor's ability to provide all 
     such documentation to the Department of Justice, as required 
     under section 115.401(j) of title 28, Code of Federal 
     Regulations.''.

     SEC. 413. ADULT AND JUVENILE COLLABORATION PROGRAMS.

       Section 2991 of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and 
     Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10651) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (b)(4)(D);
       (2) in subsection (e), by striking ``may use up to 3 
     percent'' and inserting ``shall use not less than 6 
     percent''; and
       (3) by amending subsection (g) to read as follows:
       ``(g) Collaboration Set Aside.--The Attorney General shall 
     use not less than 8 percent of funds appropriated to provide 
     technical assistance to State and local governments receiving 
     grants under this part to foster collaboration between such 
     governments in furtherance of the purposes set forth in 
     section 3 of the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime 
     Reduction Act of 2004 (34 U.S.C. 10651 note).''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.


                             General Leave

  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous materials on H.R. 5682, currently under 
consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5682, the FIRST STEP 
Act. The bipartisan bill before us is a meaningful, historic criminal 
justice reform measure.
  The FIRST STEP Act places a new focus on rehabilitation. While we 
recognize criminal behavior needs to be punished and criminals need to 
be incarcerated, we must also acknowledge that our prison population 
needs to be rehabilitated to the greatest extent practicable. The bill 
establishes a risk and needs assessment as the basis of both an 
effective recidivism reduction program and an efficient and effective 
Federal prison system.
  The FIRST STEP Act will incentivize prisoners to participate in 
evidence-based recidivism reduction programs, productive activities, 
and jobs that will actually reduce their risk of recidivism.
  We know that over 90 percent of all prisoners within the Bureau of 
Prisons

[[Page H4311]]

will be released someday. That is an indisputable fact. We also know 
that without programming and intervention, which can train prisoners to 
be better citizens, not better criminals, prisoners are more likely to 
recidivate.
  Mr. Speaker, rather than allowing the cycle of crime to continue, 
this legislation takes a practical, intelligent approach to 
rehabilitation. By using a focused approach for each prisoner, we can 
lower the risk of recidivism. That is what H.R. 5682 does.
  Fewer recidivists means fewer prisoners in the future. It means 
greater savings to the American taxpayer. More importantly, it means 
safer communities, fewer crimes, and, of course, fewer victims. It also 
means greater opportunities for people once they leave prison.
  This bill is important because when prisoners who have received 
intervention and rehabilitation are released, they are less likely to 
commit crimes. When that happens, our streets are safer and innocent 
civilians are less likely to be victimized. Rehabilitated prisoners are 
more likely to leave the life of crime behind, become productive 
members of society, and contribute to their communities. If that isn't 
meaningful, Mr. Speaker, I don't know what is.
  I know there are some in this body who are opposing this legislation 
because it does not include sentencing reform. I support sentencing 
reform and have worked with my colleagues to find common ground on that 
issue. However, we should not let this opportunity pass by. The vast 
majority of Members of this House agree that this legislation is 
needed. Let us not linger any longer. Let us move this important and 
meaningful bill today.
  Just look at the bipartisan support from outside interest groups that 
the FIRST STEP Act has received. Numerous organizations--almost too 
many to list in the allotted time we have--on both the left and the 
right have enthusiastically endorsed this bill.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chief sponsors of H.R. 
5682, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Collins) and the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Jeffries). They worked tirelessly to get this bill to the 
floor, and both should be applauded for their bipartisan approach to 
this issue.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the FIRST STEP Act, and 
I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to H.R. 5682, the FIRST 
STEP Act. On principle, I cannot support legislation which fails to 
address the larger issue of sentencing reform, and, though this bill 
makes some modest improvements in areas related to our prisons, 
actually it does more harm by cementing into our system new areas of 
racial biases and disadvantage that make worse a criminal justice 
system desperately in need of reform.
  Despite the bill's good intentions, the new incentive system for pre-
release custody credits could exacerbate racial biases and, unlike 
previous criminal justice efforts, is not balanced with the necessary 
reforms to our Federal sentencing system. As Monday's New York Times 
editorial observed: ``A partial bill could end up being worse than 
nothing.''
  The bill excludes large categories of inmates, based on convictions 
for various offenses and on immigration status, from being eligible for 
the pre-release custody incentives established by the bill.
  Second, certain prisoners who are eligible to participate in the 
incentive system and who successfully participate in recidivism 
reduction programs would face being denied early entry to pre-release 
custody if such inmates are judged to have a higher than low recidivism 
risk under the new system. It would be unfair to deny these prisoners 
what they have earned, and it is counterproductive for all of us to, in 
effect, create a disincentive for prisoners who most need recidivism 
reduction programming from engaging in it.
  Third, the combination of these factors, implemented through a 
problematic risk assessment tool, could operate to exacerbate racial 
and socioeconomic disparities already present in the criminal justice 
system. As the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the 
ACLU, the NAACP, the National Immigration Law Center, and dozens of 
other advocacy groups warn, ``the exclusions could . . . have a 
disparate impact on racial minorities.''
  I want to acknowledge the tremendous work of my colleagues on the 
Judiciary Committee--Representatives Jeffries, Richmond, and Bass 
particularly--for their efforts to improve the legislation. I 
wholeheartedly support certain provisions in the current version of the 
bill, such as expanding time credits for good behavior, banning the 
shackling of women prisoners, and enhanced compassionate relief. But, 
unfortunately, these good provisions do not outweigh the potentially 
harmful provisions contained elsewhere in the bill.

  Perhaps more importantly, it is clear that prison reform alone will 
not ameliorate the crisis of mass incarceration unless we address the 
principal cause of the problem--unjust sentencing laws. As former 
Attorney General Eric Holder writes in today's Washington Post: ``To 
reform America's prisons, we must change the laws that send people to 
them in the first place. Anything less represents a failure of 
leadership.''
  It is unfortunate that after waiting nearly 1\1/2\ years to take up 
the issue of criminal justice reform, the majority was unwilling to 
subject H.R. 5682 to a single legislative hearing or even bother to 
obtain a CBO score so we could understand its impact.
  I also do not believe we can simply accept as a reason not to change 
our sentencing laws opposition to sentencing reform by a Trump 
administration that changes its legislative positions on a near daily 
basis and that has already done so much to weaken and undermine the 
criminal justice system. Nor do I believe more balanced reform is not 
viable when Senator Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the Senate 
Judiciary Committee, told us: ``For any criminal justice system 
proposal to win approval in the Senate, it must include . . . 
sentencing reforms.''
  Although I oppose this legislation, I remain fully committed to 
achieving balanced reform as part of an effort to make our criminal 
justice system more just and our constituents more safe. But I do not 
believe that passing this bill today would contribute to that goal. I 
therefore urge an opposition vote.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. 
Ellison).
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this FIRST STEP 
Act. I spent 17 years of my life representing people accused of crimes.

                              {time}  1315

  Some of them are people whom I will never forget. One is a woman 
named Daniella. She had some prior misdemeanor offenses and was charged 
with possession of crack cocaine. She was looking at a sentence of 
about 60 months, based on the amount. She had a small child. There were 
no weapons involved.
  The prosecutors told her: If you tell on your boyfriend, we will take 
you to State court. If you don't, we are taking you to Federal court.
  They took her to Federal court. And try as I did, she ended up 
getting 60 months of prison. She got taken away from her child. I 
remember the screams of that little boy as they walked his mother into 
custody.
  I cannot imagine asking her to stay in prison one day longer than she 
needed to. I cannot imagine not giving every opportunity to improve her 
life and her skills.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I do so with a lot of 
enthusiasm today.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Rhode 
Island (Mr. Cicilline).
  Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I rise in strong support of the FIRST STEP Act. I supported this 
bipartisan bill in committee because it will help more ex-offenders 
reenter the workforce. It will reduce recidivism.
  The FIRST STEP Act is just a first step in fixing our criminal 
justice system. We all realize there is a lot more to do and a lot more 
we must do, but this is an important start.
  I would remind everyone that the bill allows prisoners to earn an 
additional 7

[[Page H4312]]

days off their sentence each year they demonstrate good behavior. It 
funds important job training, drug treatment, and education services. 
It prohibits the shackling of pregnant women and improves compassionate 
release.
  These are all very good provisions. It will not only reduce 
recidivism; it will enhance the safety of our communities by making 
sure folks have the ability to enter drug treatment, enter job 
training, and avail themselves of educational services. These are all 
commonsense ideas. I hope that everyone will support this legislation.
  I want to thank, particularly, my colleague Hakeem Jeffries for his 
strong leadership in these difficult negotiations, and I urge my 
colleagues to vote for the FIRST STEP and then commit themselves to 
continuing to build on this, because there is much more work to do in 
sentencing reform and criminal justice reform broadly.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis).
  Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I commend the Judiciary 
Committee for its tremendous work in bringing this bill to the floor. 
They have put forth tremendous effort and tried every way they could 
think of to compromise.
  But notwithstanding the effort, I find myself not in a position to 
vote in favor of the bill. One of the reasons is that many of the 
organizations and groups with whom I have worked over the years are in 
opposition. They are people who are on the ground floor of criminal 
justice reform. They recognize that, if we are going to provide an 
opportunity to seriously reduce mass incarceration, we have to make 
provisions for individuals to regain some sense of reality regarding 
what got them into prison in the first place.
  I appreciate all of the efforts. I think we have got too much 
authority being given to the Attorney General. I wish we had been able 
to get closer to what people I work with daily would be in agreement 
with. Unfortunately, we did not.
  Unfortunately, I do not support passage of the bill, but I support 
continuing to work to find the real, hard-nosed solutions that we need.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Collins), the chief sponsor of the 
legislation and a member of the Judiciary Committee.
  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague, 
Chairman  Bob Goodlatte, who has been a great supporter of working 
towards finding solutions. I think that is what we are here for today 
is finding solutions.
  I want to thank the chairman for working this, taking this, and 
moving forward on a lot of different fronts. But as we look forward, 
there are some things I want to clear up and some people I want to 
thank.
  With Hakeem Jeffries, I couldn't ask for a better partner to work 
with through the intricacies of big solutions and big problems. These 
are big problems. Mr. Jeffries and I have said: Let's take a look and 
see what we can fix.
  What is going to be said today is: I like this legislation, I like 
parts of this legislation; I like the legislation, but it doesn't go 
far enough; if it just did a little more--as if this place produced 
perfect results every time and we just want to wait.
  But I also would ask those who choose to vote ``no'' today, and my 
question is this: Is it okay to make progress on many other things but 
on this one say no? Say no to a family who has a family member in 
prison who could get treatment and get help?
  And when they come home--which over 90 percent of all prisoners in 
this country do, they come home--is it okay to say no to those folks, 
and say: No, we are not going to provide that for your family member; 
we are not going to provide extra treatment so that they can get help 
with addiction or work problems or anger management or skills deficits 
or education deficits? No, it is not.
  Is it okay today to vote ``no'' and say: I like a lot of this bill, 
but I want to continue to shackle women as they have babies?
  It is a pretty simple understanding. I get it. I want to see 
sentencing reform, too. I am on record as saying I do. I am on record 
as continuing past this to actually do that.

  Mr. Jeffries and I have talked about this more than we ever imagined 
we would. But Congressman Jeffries is a great partner in this effort.
  This bill is real and meaningful reform. Senator Cornyn and Senator 
Whitehouse across the way in the Senate have taken steps to actually 
introduce the same bill and are working to do this. The President has 
said this is something that can be signed. In fact, the President, Mr. 
Speaker, last week, said that America is a nation that believes in 
second chances.
  The FIRST STEP Act gives those second chances. It gives us hope. It 
gives us an ability to look at people. As I have said on this issue 
many times, it is a money and moral issue.
  In States like Georgia, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Texas, New York, and 
California, these issues have been discussed and evidence-based 
approaches have worked. We have seen it, Mr. Speaker, work in my home 
State of Georgia. We have seen an evidence-based approach be the way 
that you need to go. This bill provides the protection, and it also 
provides the incentive for this to work.
  Now, there have been many discussions on why we shouldn't do this, 
and there have been many people in recent days coming forward. I think 
it is pretty amazing to me--and I am going to have to be honest here--
for the former Attorney General to come out and say this is not enough 
and say that the current Department of Justice could do some of this, 
then I have one question for the former Attorney General: Where were 
you when you held the office? Why didn't you do something then? If it 
was within your grasp, why did you turn a deaf ear to the cries of 
families who were in need? Why did you decide not to do something and 
now weigh in on something that Congressman Jeffries and many others 
have put their hearts and lives into and weigh in and say it is not 
enough? Look to those families, Mr. Former Attorney General, and tell 
them it is not enough.
  It is easy to write an op-ed. It must be a lot harder to do it when 
you have the job.
  So, as we look forward here, this is a positive piece of legislation. 
This is something that we can look forward to doing, when you have a 
chance to give those prisoners the opportunity to cut the very things 
down in their life that cause them to get there to start with.
  When we begin to look at the reasons they are there--and there are 
multiple--then we are taking a first step toward solutions, a first 
step toward hope, a first step toward making a difference so that we 
can then see, if we can take this first step, then maybe we can get 
some of our colleagues to take that next step into sentencing reform 
and other areas that we have already worked on, that the chairman has 
worked on, and others across in the Senate have advocated for.
  But if we choose not to do that today, you are saying no to the 
future. Congressman Jeffries and I believe yes to the future. I know 
that when we have worked on this, it is about what we can accomplish 
and how we can accomplish it in a way that is meaningful to others.
  When we look at this, I also find it rather interesting, Mr. Speaker, 
the groups that have come together here. As we went around talking 
about this, we went to so many different groups from the left and the 
right that say this is a great first step: Justice Action Network, 
American Conservative Union, FreedomWorks, FAMM, Prison Fellowship, 
Faith and Freedom Coalition, #cut50, Heritage Action for America, and 
many, many more both on the left and the right. The Koch Foundation and 
others have said this is good. This is something we can move on. This 
provides that hope that we are searching for.
  To the bill's detractors, I respect your opinion. To the bill's 
detractors, I would just say: Why not? If why not, why not here? And if 
why not and why you don't want to here, when? Is it ever good enough? 
Can we ever get to a point?
  I think one of the things, Mr. Speaker, that we often deal with here 
is the art of the possible. Today is about the art of the possible.

[[Page H4313]]

  We have an administration that says: We will sign the bill.
  Jared Kushner has been such an advocate for this and worked with the 
administration to say: We will put forth the effort to make this work.
  We have partners in the Senate who say: We want to work and do even 
more.
  I am glad of that. And I have a partner here and many who have come 
alongside of us and have spoken to say: Let's do something today.
  Today is about action. Today is about being a part of something 
bigger than ourselves. This is a day when we can come to the floor of 
this House and be proud of why we are here.
  So many times we come down and we look at the bill and we see paper 
and we see words on a paper. But I tell you what I see, Mr. Speaker: I 
see the faces of the families behind these words. I see the faces of 
the families behind these words that it is actually going to help.
  So when you look at this vote and you look at this bill, I say: Look 
beyond the pieces of paper, look beyond the ink, and look to the 
families that will be helped.
  When you cast that ``yes'' vote, you are saying: I want to do 
something, and I am not afraid to wait on something I might want but 
know that I can take a step further now.
  It is very simple: vote ``yes'' to move it along or vote ``no'' and 
say no to those in need.
  I can agree and disagree about a lot of parts, but this is about the 
people behind the bill.
  Before I go, Mr. Speaker, though, in addition to the committee, the 
chairman, and the committee staff who have been so great, a few weeks 
ago, I had the chance to talk about a staff member of mine as a steel 
magnolia. Today, Jon Ferro, from my staff, a New York native who works 
for a Georgia Member, has earned from me the highest praise.
  He is now, as you will see in all of the groups that have worked on 
this, a Bulldog. He has worked this over and over. He has worked it to 
find solutions. For that I am thankful, and for that I am proud.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill. You could come up with every reason 
you want to vote ``no,'' and that is okay, I guess; but remember, there 
are families watching today. There are incarcerated people watching 
today. My question is: Will you vote for them or will you vote to hold 
up something that may or may not happen?
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Bass), a member of the Judiciary Committee.
  Ms. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the FIRST STEP Act.
  There are thousands of women who are incarcerated while pregnant. My 
language in the FIRST STEP Act addresses the treatment of pregnant 
inmates and the use of shackles.
  The current system is based on a male model that fails to meet the 
physical and mental health needs of women. This is occurring at a time 
when women are the fastest growing population in our prisons and jails, 
increasing in number by over 700 percent since the 1980s.
  The treatment of incarcerated women is particularly glaring during 
pregnancy, delivery, and postpartum. Pregnant women must be provided 
appropriate prenatal care, which includes nutrition and housing.
  We can also agree it defies common sense and logic to use shackles on 
a woman who is delivering a baby. More than 22 States have restricted 
the use on pregnant women, yet the practice continues. This is despite 
no reported incidents of women attempting to escape when shackles are 
not used during childbirth. If anyone knows of a woman who is able to 
jump up while delivering and overcome an armed guard, I would certainly 
like to meet her.
  Women across the country have shared their horror stories about being 
pregnant or delivering while shackled. The experiences are as grim as 
you can imagine. One mother recounted being shackled after having an 
emergency C-section. She was handcuffed and a chain was linked across 
her belly.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Carter of Georgia). The time of the 
gentlewoman has expired.

                              {time}  1330

  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 
seconds.
  Ms. BASS. She stated: ``With the weight on my stomach, it felt like 
they were ripping open my C-section.''
  We must institute Federal standards and educate correction officers, 
medical personnel, and pregnant inmates regarding the standard of care 
for pregnant women. Women must be a part of the debate on prison and 
sentencing reform.
  Mr. Speaker, I look forward to introducing additional legislation to 
highlight this issue.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Louisiana (Mr. Richmond), a member of the Judiciary Committee.
  Mr. RICHMOND. Mr. Speaker, let me thank Congressman Jeffries and 
Congressman Collins for this FIRST STEP Act.
  Does it go as far as I would want it to go? It doesn't. But is it a 
substantial step in the right direction? The answer is yes.
  When we start talking about prison reform, we start talking about 
ways to help those who are incarcerated, one, when they get out; two, 
to better themselves when they are already in.
  And one of the things we do in this bill is to allow movement of 
inmates closer to their families so that they can keep that family 
connection, so that they can continue to be a part of the family, which 
also reduces recidivism.
  We also fix the ``good time'' problem that has happened. For every 7 
days that you increase good time, you save $50 million a year. Not only 
did we fix it this year, but we fixed the problem BOP interpreted in 
the law, contrary to congressional intent, in the first place.
  So this bill takes, I believe, a significant step in the right 
direction, not to mention the $250 million toward restorative justice 
and other ways. Hopefully, the savings from this bill will continue to 
go toward criminal justice and we will continue to take second and 
third steps.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Jeffries), a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee.
  Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Goodlatte as well as 
several distinguished members of the Judiciary Committee--in 
particular, Cedric Richmond and Karen Bass--for their leadership on 
this issue and, of course, my good friend Doug Collins for being a 
phenomenal champion of improving the lives of currently incarcerated 
individuals, folks who have no time for political games.
  These are individuals who are in the system right now without hope, 
without opportunity, without a meaningful chance at transforming 
themselves. And the FIRST STEP Act will provide that.
  It will give them an opportunity to get educated now, give them an 
opportunity to get vocational training now, a GED now, a college 
education now, give them the opportunity to deal with their substance 
abuse problem now, mental health counseling now. Why would we possibly 
refuse that?
  These individuals are amongst the least, the lost, and the left 
behind. And we have an opportunity, in a bipartisan way, to make a 
difference in their lives in so many areas. Any objective reading of 
this bill is that it will improve their quality of life.
  And what is so wonderful about this is that you have the right and 
the left, conservatives and progressives, united in this effort.
  Nothing meaningful is ever easy, but the mass incarceration epidemic 
has been with us for almost 50 years. You will not just take one 
legislative magic wand and wipe it away in one shot. It will require 
sustained effort, sustained intensity, sustained commitment, and a 
meaningful first step. That is what this bill represents.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this effort to 
transform lives, save taxpayer dollars, and dramatically reduce 
recidivism now.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from

[[Page H4314]]

Washington (Ms. Jayapal), a distinguished member of the Judiciary 
Committee.
  Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, there is one thing everybody agrees on, and 
that is that it is past time that we face the institutionalized racial 
inequity that is built into every single step of our mass incarceration 
system.
  We know that mass incarceration disproportionately affects people of 
color and that, today, women in prison are, sadly, the fastest growing 
demographic, frequently caught up with the arrests of their partners 
and struggling with mental health and addiction.
  This bill does take important steps forward, and I want to say that 
it is a very good faith effort on the part of the bill's two sponsors: 
my friend Hakeem Jeffries and Representative Doug Collins.
  Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, I still am not going to be able to 
support the bill because I have serious concerns about how the bill 
creates, develops, and implements a new risk assessment system on a 
very quick timeline by someone who, frankly, has spent his career 
opposing criminal justice reforms and, in fact, has fought attempts to 
advance racial justice, and that is Attorney General Sessions.
  This is especially concerning given that research shows us that risk 
assessments produce racial disparities. And this bill does not address 
sentencing reform, which is an issue that has bipartisan support and is 
the crux of the problem today.
  In addition, Mr. Speaker, I am very concerned about language in the 
bill that excludes immigrants from being eligible for time credits. The 
bill excludes longtime, legal permanent residents, green card holders, 
who may have committed the exact same crimes as others and may be 
eligible for relief under U.S. law. If we are making redemption 
available, shouldn't it be available for everyone, regardless of 
immigration status, for the same set of crimes?

  Moreover, continued incarceration of these people simply based upon 
citizenship status is a waste of taxpayer dollars and unnecessarily 
keeps families separated.
  The reality is that these are deeply important issues, and this bill 
shows that we have the capacity to work in a bipartisan way. Even with 
all of the good work and even for a first step, unfortunately, I 
believe we have more work to do to get to the place where our morals 
are being consistently applied.
  I look forward to doing everything I can to work on this.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close whenever the 
gentleman from New York is, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I have one further speaker, and then I will 
be prepared to close.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson Lee), the distinguished ranking member of the Subcommittee on 
Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I, too, want to offer my appreciation 
for all of my colleagues--in particular, those who have offered this 
legislation.
  I recall, in the Congress preceding this, we offered a bipartisan 
combination of comprehensive criminal justice reform, took bills that 
included prison reform and sentencing reform, and were really on the 
way to passing that combination of very important partnership. 
Unfortunately, the politics of that time got in the way.
  But my appreciation to Mr. Jeffries and Mr. Collins. It really is the 
coming together of Members. Mr. Nadler worked very hard to inject very 
important provisions, as well as many other Members. And they even did 
so on the day of the markup. And all but one that Mr. Richmond, Ms. 
Jackson Lee, Ms. Jayapal, and Mrs. Demings put in on retroactivity 
failed in the committee.
  So let me give an open letter to the mothers and fathers of 
incarcerated persons who are in our constituency and, as well, to those 
inmates who may, by chance, be looking at this debate. Having recently 
visited one of the Federal centers, I know that inmates are astute and 
concerned about their future.
  So I think it is important to establish to those parents why 
Democrats have consistently tried to sew together, tried to stitch 
together the idea of sentencing reduction and prison reform.
  Elements of this bill are striking and good. But to a mom, is it more 
exciting for you to know that your son, who had an excessive sentencing 
because of mandatory minimums, and you, who are incarcerated, have your 
sentence reduced than maybe on the back end?
  Now, it is important to note that all of those, if this bill is 
passed, will participate in the rehabilitation programs, but it is also 
important to note that the Bureau of Prisons has closed halfway houses. 
That is a component of this bill. And they have reduced and cut the 
numbers of individuals who are corrections officers to the extent that 
corrections officers feel endangered and that augmentation has been 
used.
  Augmentation means that nurses and teachers and others who are inside 
the prison are being used to augment the staff of correction officers 
which have been fired--or terminated, rather--under this 
administration.
  In a letter from the BOP union president, they indicated that they 
are severely understaffed and it would be difficult to implement this 
bill without those aspects being remedied--meaning more staff, more 
halfway houses, more money to implement this program.
  So many of my friends have asked me: What is the harm? Let me give 
you what is the harm.
  First, it would divert limited resources for programming by requiring 
a complex risk assessment process that would primarily benefit people 
deemed at a low or minimum risk of recidivism.
  That means, if you came in with a harsh drug sentence but through the 
years, Mom or Dad, you saw your son or daughter fix their lives, you 
would note that they, in fact, would not be eligible for this program.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 
seconds.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, without provisions in the bill to 
reduce the excessive sentencing produced by mandatory minimums for drug 
offenses, overcrowding will still persist and thereby divert resources 
from programs to reduce recidivism.
  Let me be very clear: The corrections officers indicate they don't 
have the staff. Halfway houses have been closed.
  In addition, it is documented that, if your son or daughter has an 
offense that was considered excluded and they have repaired their life, 
through the prison they have made changes, they will not be eligible--
not for the programs, but they will not be eligible for relief.
  So it is a first step. But I would simply say: If it is the first 
step, why not protection of immigrants? And, also, why not have a 
sentencing reform hearing, which the Republicans have canceled because 
of my position on this bill?
  Let us work together for what is good, Mr. Speaker. Let us make a 
difference in the lives of all of the inmates.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on H.R. 5682, the ``FIRST STEP Act of 
2018'' and thank my colleagues, Mr. Jeffries and Mr. Collins for 
bringing this forward. This legislation purports to help reduce 
recidivism for the millions of formerly incarcerated people that will 
return to our communities. I respectfully reserve the right to voice my 
concerns with this bill.
  First, as the NY Times editorial noted, ``the biggest problem with 
the FIRST STEP Act is . . . . what's left out, specifically, sentencing 
reform.'' Eric Holder said in the Washington Post, ``by choosing a 
tepid approach, the prison reform bill abandons years of work and risks 
making it harder for Congress to advance more serious legislation in 
the future. Meaningful sentencing reform will be less likely to occur 
if the narrow prison bill is enacted.''
  Even President Trump specifically stated during his remarks at the 
White House Prison Reform Summit last Friday, ``we want the finest 
prison reform bill that you could have anywhere.'' I agree with the 
President on this, as I also want the finest prison reform bill. Hence, 
I will continue to fight for the very best legislation that will 
adequately address the nearly 650,900 formerly incarcerated people that 
will return to our communities a year. That's not partisan or personal 
politics, but rather, common sense, just and equitable politics.
  Imagine you are a mother, child or loved one of an incarcerated 
person that was robbed by a system that played Russian roulette with 
his or her life because that system

[[Page H4315]]

decided they were criminals rather than victims of a public health 
crisis during the crack epidemic. Now imagine that same system, rather 
than remediating the tragedy it caused in broken homes and communities 
through inept policies that had a racial and economic disparate impact, 
now seeks to pat them on the back and further insult an entire race by 
feeding them crumbs.
  As a mother or loved one, you would demand that the system cure the 
defect in those sentencing laws that would drastically reduce his or 
her time in custody, and apply justice equitably. Let's not forget what 
happened in the 1964 Crime bill. Congress has the power to do that. We 
should hold ourselves accountable to deliver on the promise we made 
when we acknowledged the draconian policies implemented during the 
``War on Drugs'' crisis, in passing the Fair Sentencing Act. Let's 
finish what we started then, by appealing to our better angels and not 
crucify each other because we disagree.
  As Families Against Mandatory Minimum indicated in their letter, 
``sentencing reform should be included in any final justice reform 
package.''
  Second, even if the majority chose to ignore sentencing reform due to 
pressure, we cannot sit idly by and allow a slim-fast version of prison 
reform when dealing with the lives of millions of people.
  I will not apologize for demanding more from my colleagues. I will 
not apologize for fighting with every breath I have to secure justice 
for those left behind. And I will not apologize for doing my job and 
shedding light where we may fall short, even when we have in good 
faith, tried our best. We will all go home tonight. What about those 
that have longed for that same freedom after they've paid their debts 
to society. We owe it to ourselves, to the thousands of broken 
families, and to our society, to give each inmate that will return to 
our community, their best chance at success, by providing them 
incentives that will get them home to their families sooner also.
  Even the bill's supporter at markup said in their letter, ``the bill 
unwisely reserves its incentivized programming for those who already 
pose little threat of re-offending'', for example, those that would 
commit the sort of crimes alleged against Kushner and others within 
Trump's orbit. The supporters go on to say, ``We fear that the bill's 
failure to direct incentivized programming to the group that needs it 
most will result in little or no reduction in recidivism, and, worse, 
that that failure will be blamed on prisoners rather than the bill's 
mistaken design.'' Most alarming here, is that great skepticism looms 
even in those who want to support this endeavor, because the reality is 
that the risk assessment tool is flawed.
  This Kushner/Trump bill amounts to nothing more than a false sense of 
hope for those who will never be released, due to either lack of 
shelter given the significant reduction in housing, or lack of 
eligibility per the warden.
  The wide latitude and discretion given to Sessions, a person who 
whole-heartedly opposes any form of effective criminal justice reform, 
and proponent of over-criminalization, will inevitably prove 
problematic for many who otherwise would benefit greatly from this 
measure with some modicum of oversight. We should take our time to 
include an independent committee that would serve as a bulwark in the 
development, implementation and recommendation process of such a 
program that will use novice and untested tools at the federal level.
  Why must we rush this process? Why not take our time to produce the 
finest prison reform bill anywhere as the President suggested? I 
visited and spoke directly to guards and wardens in the BOP. They told 
me they are severely understaffed and safety is paramount given the 
shortage in staff. The Director of BOP quit, in the middle of Trump's 
Prison Reform Summit. All of these facts tell us to wait so that we 
could get it right. In NOBLE's opposition letter to this bill they 
write: ``a key concern is the ability of the Federal BOP and U.S. 
Attorney Offices to implement key elements of this legislation. In 
particular, it will require that U.S. Attorney Offices and BOP address 
their needs in staffing and funding. It is our opinion that the 
proposed $50 million of funding per year for five years will not 
support the bill's expanded programming.'' For these reasons I oppose 
this bill, and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.
  The Act does not include a single provision that will reduce the 
prison time of persons who are serving unfair sentences for low-level 
offenses. Even supporters of the bill like FAMM states, ``sentencing 
reform should be included in any final justice reform package.''
  The Act uses an untested and potentially racially and socially 
discriminatory risk assessment to identify individuals who are eligible 
to earn credits, which primarily depends on static factors that 
correlate with socioeconomic class and race, such as criminal history, 
to assess the risk. Therefore, it will likely fail to reduce crime or 
mass incarceration.
  The Act's exclusions would likely have a disparate impact on racial 
minorities because the bill excludes individuals convicted of certain 
categories of offenses from redeeming credits towards early release, 
even if they successfully complete the program.
  The Act leaves it to the discretion of prison wardens to determine 
who can use their credits and when.
  Early release would be into a halfway house system which is so 
underfunded that there is no bed space. Therefore, it will be unlikely 
that prisoners can truly be released given the reality of the current 
halfway house system.
  The Act gives a false sense of hope because it wraps the empty 
promise of prison reform around exclusions and wide breadth of 
discretion to a full-throated opponent to prison reform, policing 
reform and sentencing reform, in Jeff Sessions.
  BOP already has broad authority to implement the positive provisions 
of the bill, but has opted not to and Sessions cannot be trusted to 
implement these provisions.
  The FIRST STEP Act includes a list of prisoners who are ineligible 
for time credits if they participate in recidivism reduction programs 
by virtue of their convictions for certain offenses. Prisoners who are 
excluded from time credits are those convicted under Title 18, in the 
following sections:
  ``(i) Section 113(a)(1), relating to assault with intent to commit 
murder.
  ``(ii) Section 115, relating to influencing, impeding, or retaliating 
against a Federal official by injuring a family member, except for a 
threat made in violation of that section.
  ``(iii) Any section of chapter 10, relating to biological weapons.
  ``(iv) Any section of chapter 11B, relating to chemical weapons.
  ``(v) Section 351, relating to Congressional, Cabinet, and Supreme 
Court assassination, kidnapping, and assault.
  ``(vi) Section 793, relating to gathering, transmitting, or losing 
defense information.
  ``(vii) Section 794, relating to gathering or delivering defense 
information to aid a foreign government.
  ``(viii) Any section of chapter 39, relating to explosives and other 
dangerous articles, except for section 836 (relating to the 
transportation of fireworks into a State prohibiting sale or use).
  ``(ix) Section 842(p), relating to distribution of information 
relating to explosive, destructive devices, and weapons of mass 
destruction, but only if the conviction involved a weapon of mass 
destruction (as defined in section 2332a(c)(2) of such title).
  ``(x) Subsection (f)(3), (h), or (i) of section 844, relating to the 
use of fire or an explosive.
  ``(xi) Section 924(e), relating to unlawful possession of a firearm 
by a person with 3 or more convictions for a violent felony.
  ``(xii) Section 1030(a)(1), relating to fraud and related activity in 
connection with computers.
  ``(xiii) Any section of chapter 51, relating to homicide, except for 
section 1112 (relating to manslaughter), 1113 (relating to attempt to 
commit murder or manslaughter, but only if the conviction was for an 
attempt to commit manslaughter), 1115 (relating to misconduct or 
neglect of ship officers), or 1122 (relating to protection against the 
human immunodeficiency virus).
  ``(xiv) Any section of chapter 55, relating to kidnapping.
  ``(xv) Any offense under chapter 77, relating to peonage, slavery, 
and trafficking in persons, except for sections 1592 through 1596.
  ``(xvi) Section 1751, relating to Presidential and Presidential staff 
assassination, kidnapping, and assault.
  ``(xvii) Section 1841(a)(2)(C), relating to intentionally killing or 
attempting to kill an unborn child.
  ``(xviii) Section 1992, relating to terrorist attacks and other 
violence against railroad carriers and against mass transportation 
systems on land, on water, or through the air.
  ``(xix) Section 2113(e), relating to bank robbery resulting in death.
  ``(xx) Section 2118(c)(2), relating to robberies and burglaries 
involving controlled substances resulting in death.
  ``(xxi) Section 2119(3), relating to taking a motor vehicle (commonly 
referred to as `carjacking') that results in death.
  ``(xxii) Any section of chapter 105, relating to sabotage, except for 
section 2152.
  ``(xxiii) Any section of chapter 109A, relating to sexual abuse, 
except that with regard to section 2244, only a conviction under 
subsection (c) of that section (relating to abusive sexual contact 
involving young children) shall make a prisoner ineligible under this 
subparagraph.
  ``(xxiv) Section 2251, relating to the sexual exploitation of 
children.
  ``(xxv) Section 2251A, relating to the selling or buying of children.
  ``(xxvi) Any of paragraphs (1) through (3) of section 2252(a), 
relating to certain activities relating to material involving the 
sexual exploitation of minors.

[[Page H4316]]

  ``(xxvii) A second or subsequent conviction under any of paragraphs 
(1) through (6) of section 2252A(a), relating to certain activities 
relating to material constituting or containing child pornography.
  ``(xxviii) Section 2260, relating to the production of sexually 
explicit depictions of a minor for importation into the United States.
  ``(xxix) Section 2283, relating to the transportation of explosive, 
biological, chemical, or radioactive or nuclear materials.
  ``(xxx) Section 2284, relating to the transportation of terrorists.
  ``(xxxi) Section 2291, relating to the destruction of a vessel or 
maritime facility, but only if the conduct which led to the conviction 
involved a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
  ``(xxxii) Any section of chapter 113B, relating to terrorism.
  ``(xxxiii) Section 2340A, relating to torture.
  ``(xxxiv) Section 2381, relating to treason.
  ``(xxxv) Section 2442, relating to the recruitment or use of child 
soldiers.
  The exclusions also apply to convictions under the following sections 
of Title 42, Title 49, Title 21, Title 8 and Title 50:
  ``(xxxvi) Section 57(b) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 
2077(b)), relating to the engagement or participation in the 
development or production of special nuclear material.
  ``(xxxvii) Section 92 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 
2122), relating to prohibitions governing atomic weapons.
  ``(xxxviii) Section 101 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 
2131), relating to the atomic, energy license requirement.
  ``(xxxix) Section 224 or 225 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 
U.S.C. 2274, 2275), relating to the communication or receipt of 
restricted data.
  ``(xl) Section 236 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2284), 
relating to the sabotage of nuclear facilities or fuel.
  ``(xli) Section 60123(b) of title 49, United States Code, relating to 
damaging or destroying a pipeline facility, but only if the conduct 
which led to the conviction involved a substantial risk of death or 
serious bodily injury.
  ``(xlii) Section 401(a) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 
841), relating to manufacturing or distributing a controlled substance, 
but only in the case of a conviction for an offense described in 
subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of subsection (b)(1) of that section for 
which death or serious bodily injury resulted from the use of such 
substance.
  ``(xliii) Section 276(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
U.S.C. 1326), relating to the reentry of a removed alien, but only if 
the alien is described in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (b) of 
that section.
  ``(xliv) Any section of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 
U.S.C. App. 2401 et seq.)
  ``(xlv) Section 206 of the International Emergency Economic Powers 
Act (50 U.S.C. 1705).
  ``(xlvi) Section 601 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 
3121), relating to the protection of identities of certain United 
States undercover intelligence officers, agents, informants, and 
sources.
  The exclusions also apply those prisoners convicted of a prior 
Federal or State ``serious violent felony,'' described as follows (in 
Title 18):
  ``(xlvii) An offense described in section 3559(c)(2)(F), for which 
the offender was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than one 
year, if the offender has a previous conviction, for which the offender 
served a term of imprisonment of more than one year, for a Federal or 
State offense, by whatever designation and wherever committed, 
consisting of murder (as described in section 1111), voluntary 
manslaughter (as described in section 1112), assault with intent to 
commit murder (as described in section 113(a)), aggravated sexual abuse 
and sexual abuse (as described in sections 2241 and 2242), abusive 
sexual contact (as described in sections 2244(a)(1) and (a)(2)), 
kidnapping (as described in chapter 55), carjacking (as described in 
section 2119), arson (as described in section 844(f)(3), (h), or (i)), 
or terrorism (as described in chapter 113B.
  Finally, prisoners may not obtain credit for participation in 
recidivism reduction programs if they: (1) completed recidivism 
reduction programming before enactment of the Act; (2) completed 
recidivism reduction programming during official detention before 
moving to Bureau of Prisons; or (3) are inadmissible or deportable 
under immigration law.

                                         The Leadership Conference


                                    on Civil and Human Rights,

                                     Washington, DC, May 21, 2018.

                   Vote ``No'' on The FIRST STEP Act

       Dear Representative: On behalf of The Leadership Conference 
     on Civil and Human Rights, and the 109 undersigned 
     organizations, we write to urge you to vote NO on The FIRST 
     STEP Act (H.R. 5682). While well intentioned, this bill takes 
     a misguided approach to reforming our federal justice system. 
     Without question, we appreciate the inclusion of some 
     promising provisions to address some of the problems in the 
     federal prison system, however, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) 
     already has broad authority to make the majority of these 
     changes through administrative action. In sum, this bill 
     falls short on its promise to ``meaningfully'' tackle the 
     problems in the federal justice system--racial disparities, 
     draconian mandatory minimum sentences, persistent 
     overcrowding, lack of rehabilitation, and the exorbitant 
     costs of incarceration. Decisions we make now through this 
     bill could have deep implications for our ability to impact 
     the abiding and deepening harms that lead to mass 
     incarceration.
       As such, we continue to have several, grave concerns with 
     The FIRST STEP Act, including:
       The Dangerous ``Risk Assessment System'': The Act purports 
     to offer people in prison the chance to ``earn time credits'' 
     towards early release to pre-release custody--but by building 
     and placing a ``risk and needs assessment'' algorithm in the 
     hands of the Attorney General--one not required to be 
     designed or tailored for the individuals it is meant to 
     judge--we risk embedding deep racial and class bias into 
     decisions that heavily impact the lives and futures of 
     federal prisoners and their families.
       Researchers have shown that risk assessment tools applied 
     in sentencing decisions in Florida--meant to predict 
     recidivism--were twice as likely to be wrong when evaluating 
     Black people as White people. One of the first independent 
     studies analyzing the use of risk assessment in pretrial 
     showed that decisionmakers using risk assessment tools--in 
     this case, Kentucky judges--ignored their results over time, 
     while also overseeing an increase in failures-to-appear at 
     court and an increase in pretrial arrests. A further recent 
     analysis showed that risk assessment tools are as accurate as 
     a prediction made by a random human selected over the 
     Internet.
       We cannot introduce algorithmic risk assessment into the 
     assignment of housing and release decisions or rehabilitative 
     opportunities without sufficient transparency, independent 
     testing for decarceral and anti-racist results prior to 
     implementation, and regular effective oversight for not just 
     what the tool purports to predict, but how decisionmakers in 
     our prison system use it. The Act uses ``risk assessments'' 
     in an untested manner. It fails to ensure transparency, 
     independent testing, or analysis of the proposed risk 
     assessment system or its results prior to its adoption or 
     implementation. And again, it doesn't require the tool to be 
     designed or tailored for the individuals it is meant to 
     judge.
       Without these things, and in the hands of the nation's most 
     prominent proponent of a punishing, rather than a 
     rehabilitative criminal justice system, ``risk assessments'' 
     will further embed racism into the meting out of resources 
     that could change prisoners' lives--like access to treatment, 
     work, and most importantly, the ability to earn time off of a 
     sentence.
       The Overbroad List of Exclusions: The majority of people in 
     prison will eventually be released. Categorically excluding 
     entire groups of people from receiving early-release credits 
     will undermine efforts to reduce prison overcrowding and 
     improve public safety since such exclusions weaken the 
     incentive to participate in recidivism-reduction programming. 
     Furthermore, many of these exclusions, such as those based on 
     immigration-related offenses, could have a disproportionate 
     impact on people of color.
       The Overbroad Discretion Provided to Attorney General 
     Sessions: The bill gives broad authority to the Attorney 
     General and would rely upon implementation by this 
     administration. Despite assurances to the contrary, this 
     administration has failed to take any active steps to improve 
     the justice system, has dismantled existing protections, and 
     has shown outright hostility to people of color and other 
     historically marginalized communities. Furthermore, Attorney 
     General Jeff Sessions is a well-known, longtime opponent of 
     sentencing and prison reform. It would be unwise and harmful 
     to vest so much discretion in an Attorney General so hostile 
     to meaningful justice reform.
       The Misplaced Incentive System: Effectively reducing 
     recidivism requires targeting those most likely to reoffend 
     with rehabilitative programming. Yet, under this bill, only 
     ``minimum'' and ``low-risk'' prisoners would be able to 
     redeem their earned time credits, and they would earn more 
     credits than prisoners categorized as ``medium'' or ``high-
     risk.'' Given that time credits would also be subject to 
     denial by the BOP warden and they are not real time off of a 
     sentence but rather a flawed mechanism to transition into a 
     decreasing number of halfway houses or to home confinement 
     that is rarely used by BOP, the bill is unlikely to provide 
     the incentives that would meaningfully reduce recidivism.
       Allows for the privatization of certain public functions 
     and allows private entities to profit from incarceration. The 
     bill retains a provision that in order to expand programming 
     and productive activities, the Attorney General shall develop 
     policies for wardens of each BOP facility to enter into 
     partnerships with private entities and industry-sponsored 
     organizations.
       The Absence of Appropriations for Implementation: The 
     resources needed to expand programming authorized under the 
     bill have not been--and may never be--appropriated. In fact, 
     Congress could decide today, absent this legislation, that 
     prison programming should be funded and increase the BOP's 
     budget by $50 million a year for the next five

[[Page H4317]]

     years. Instead, the FY19 BOP budget calls for a reduction. 
     Furthermore, the recidivism reduction programming that 
     currently exists in the federal prison system is grossly 
     underfunded and not enough to serve those currently 
     incarcerated. Therefore, without any guarantees that the 
     necessary funding will be appropriated, this bill is an empty 
     promise.
       The Undetermined Human and Fiscal Impact: It is unclear 
     what the fiscal impact of this bill will be, given that the 
     Congressional Budget Office has not released a score for the 
     bill. Moreover, it is unclear what the human impact of this 
     bill will be, given that neither the BOP nor the U.S. 
     Sentencing Commission has produced updated estimates on the 
     number of people projected to be impacted by the legislation. 
     Proponents argue that at least 4,000 people will be impacted 
     by the good time fix alone; however, relying on that number 
     is misleading because it is based upon data that is over a 
     decade old. No hearings have been held and there is no CBO 
     score available in order to explore these questions further.
       The Omission of Sentencing Reform: Sentencing reform and 
     prison reform are both important, but one will not work 
     without the other. Meaningful reform requires both. 
     Furthermore, advancing prison reform as a stand-alone will 
     undermine longstanding, bipartisan efforts in the Senate to 
     advance a comprehensive justice reform package that includes 
     sentencing reform.
       Last week, we were joined by over 70 civil rights 
     organizations in opposing this well-intentioned, but 
     misguided legislation at the House Judiciary Committee 
     markup. Many of our concerns were also shared by the American 
     Federation of Government Employees representing 33,000 
     federal correctional workers in the Bureau of Prisons, as 
     well as Representatives Lewis, Jackson Lee, and Senators 
     Durbin, Booker, and Harris in a recent Dear Colleague letter. 
     While we appreciate the inclination to support legislation 
     that endeavors to reform our prison system, we believe that 
     this particular bill would do more harm than good and would 
     have unintended consequences that ripple into the future.
       Finally, if presented with one choice, ``to take what we 
     can get now,'' then we must ensure that ``what we get'' will 
     not perpetuate the existing harms of mass incarceration or 
     give false hope to the men and women languishing in prison 
     and the communities we represent. Our communities are being 
     demonized and criminalized so we must stand firm to resist 
     the lure of a compromise that is ultimately a false promise 
     that may never be realized and isn't in their best interests.
       For the foregoing reasons, we urge you to vote ``No'' on 
     the FIRST STEP Act and The Leadership Conference will include 
     your position on the bill in our voting scorecard for the 
     115th Congress.
       Sincerely,
       The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; 334 
     East 92nd Street Tenant Association; A. Philip Randolph 
     Institute; African American Ministers In Action; American 
     Civil Liberties Union; American Federation of Labor-Congress 
     of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO); American Humanist 
     Association; Arkansas United Community Coalition; Asian 
     Americans Advancing Justice--AAJC; Asian Pacific American 
     Labor Alliance; Association of University Centers on 
     Disabilities (AUCD); Autistic Self Advocacy Network; Autistic 
     Women & Nonbinary Network; Bazelon Center for Mental Health 
     Law; Bend the Arc Jewish Action; Black Alliance for Just 
     Immigration; Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law; 
     Buried Alive Project; Campaign for Youth Justice; Casa de 
     Esperanza: National Latin@ Network for Healthy Families and 
     Communities.
       Center for Community Change Action; Center for Community 
     Self-Help; Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP); Center 
     for Popular Democracy; Center for Responsible Lending; 
     Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA); Coalition of 
     Black Trade Unionists; Coalition on Human Needs; CURE 
     (Citizens United for Rehabilitation of Errants); Defending 
     Rights & Dissent; Demos; Disability Rights Education & 
     Defense Fund; Drug Policy Alliance (DPA); Equal Justice 
     Society; Equal Rights Advocates; Equality California; Equity 
     Matters; Evangelical Lutheran Church in America; Faith Action 
     Network--Washington State; Faith in Public Life.
       Government Information Watch; Harm Reduction Coalition; Hip 
     Hop Caucus; Hispanic Federation; Human Rights Watch; 
     Immigrant Legal Resource Center; Indivisible; Japanese 
     American Citizens League; Jewish Council for Public Affairs 
     (JCPA); Justice Strategies; Juvenile Law Center; 
     LatinoJustice PRLDEF; Law Enforcement Action Partnership; 
     Let's Start, Inc.; Mommieactivist and Sons; MomsRising; 
     NAACP; NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.; 
     National Action Network's Washington Bureau; National 
     Alliance to End Sexual Violence.
       National Association of Human Rights Workers; National 
     Association of Social Worker; National Bar Association (NBA); 
     National Black Justice Coalition; National Center for Lesbian 
     Rights; National Coalition Against Domestic Violence; 
     National Coalition on Black Civic Participation; National 
     Council of Churches; National Disability Rights Network; 
     National Education Association; National Employment Law 
     Project; National Hispanic Media Coalition; National 
     Immigrant Justice Center; National Immigration Law Center; 
     National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild; 
     National Juvenile Justice Network; National LGBTQ Task Force 
     Action Fund; National Organization for Women; National 
     Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE); 
     National Religious Campaign Against Torture.
       NETWORK Lobby for Catholic Social Justice; Pennsylvania 
     Immigration and Citizenship Coalition; People For the 
     American Way (PFAW); PFLAG National; Prison Policy 
     Initiative; Safer Foundation; Sargent Shriver National Center 
     on Poverty Law; Service Employees International Union (SEIU); 
     Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund (SALDEF); 
     Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (SEARAC); Southern 
     Poverty Law Center (SPLC); Students for Sensible Drug Policy; 
     The Center for Media Justice; The Daniel Initiative; The 
     Decarceration Collective.
       The National Council for Incarcerated and Formerly 
     Incarcerated Women and Girls; The United Church of Christ; 
     The United Methodist Church--General Board of Church and 
     Society; T'ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights; 
     UndocuBlack Network; UnidosUS; Union for Reform Judaism; 
     United Church of Christ, Local Church Ministries; United 
     Church of Christ, Justice and Witness Ministries; United We 
     Dream; V-Day and One Billion Rising; Washington Lawyers' 
     Committee for Civil Rights & Urban Affairs; We Belong 
     Together; Woodhull Freedom Foundation; World Without 
     Genocide.
                                  ____



                                       The Sentencing Project,

                                     Washington, DC, May 21, 2018.
     Re FIRST STEP Act, H.R. 5682, falls far short of meaningful 
         criminal justice reform.

     Hon. Paul D. Ryan,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Charles E. Schumer,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan, Majority Leader McConnell and Minority 
     Leaders Pelosi and Schumer: As Congress prepares to consider 
     the FIRST STEP Act, I write to express The Sentencing 
     Project's significant concerns regarding the bill's 
     deficiencies in addressing the overcrowding, staffing and 
     programming crisis within the Bureau of Prisons (BOP). Reform 
     of the federal prison and sentencing system is long overdue 
     and The Sentencing Project has been at the forefront of 
     promoting comprehensive recommendations to ensure a more 
     humane, fair and proportional system for more than two 
     decades.
       Unfortunately, H.R. 5683 falls short of these objectives in 
     two key areas. First, it would divert limited resources for 
     programming by requiring a complex risk assessment process 
     that would primarily benefit people deemed at a low or 
     minimal risk of recidivating. Second, without provisions in 
     the bill to reduce the excessive sentencing produced by 
     mandatory minimums for drug offenses, overcrowding will 
     persist and thereby divert resources from programs to reduce 
     recidivism.
       The federal prison system currently operates at 14 percent 
     above capacity, and at higher rates at high and medium 
     security institutions, 24 percent and 18 percent 
     respectively. Along with an ``inmate to correctional 
     officer'' ratio among the highest in the country at 8.9 to 1, 
     prison safety concerns are at critical levels. Indeed, the 
     rate for some types of assaults in federal prisons has 
     steadily increased since 2014. In order to successfully 
     reform the federal prison system, including improving 
     conditions of confinement in areas such as medical and mental 
     health care, and to comprehensively rehabilitate instead of 
     warehouse the people confined within, Congress should adopt 
     policies to reduce the population, invest in correctional and 
     programming staff, and fully fund programming for all 
     incarcerated people.
       H.R. 5682 would authorize only $50 million per year to 
     carry out the bill's mandates to create a risk assessment 
     tool to determine earned time credit eligibility, and expand 
     programming and community corrections capacity. While The 
     Sentencing Project supports the bill sponsors' stated 
     intentions to reform prisons, their promises of change ring 
     hollow. For example, the bill excludes thousands of people in 
     prison from benefiting from the programming incentives that 
     allow for earlier transition into community corrections. By 
     doing so it conflicts with research that demonstrates that 
     prison programming and associated incentives are most cost-
     effective when provided to the highest risk groups.
       Current authorization levels will only scratch the surface 
     in overcoming the huge deficit of programming at the BOP. 
     Indeed, the waiting list for the BOP's literacy program alone 
     is 16,000. Moreover, because of overcrowding and staff 
     shortages, many programming staff are regularly required to

[[Page H4318]]

     augment correctional officer duties, resulting in fewer 
     programming opportunities. This staffing shortage may partly 
     explain why the number of people completing their GED dropped 
     by 59 percent between FY2016 and FY2017. Congress must take 
     more determined and thoughtful steps to change this dire 
     situation.
       The Sentencing Project is pleased by the growing bipartisan 
     consensus among lawmakers to prioritize change in the 
     nation's criminal justice system. We will continue to be a 
     part of this conversation and look forward to strengthening 
     effective bipartisan reforms to achieve shared goals of 
     justice, fairness and safety.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Marc Mauer,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____


                [From the Washington Post, May 21, 2018]

   There's Something Huge Missing From the White House's Prison Bill

                        (By Eric H. Holder Jr.)

       Over the past decade, Republicans and Democrats across the 
     country have joined forces to advocate for a fairer, more 
     effective criminal-justice system--one that would keep us 
     safe while reducing unnecessary mass incarceration. At the 
     heart of that effort has been an attempt to reduce overly 
     punitive sentences that fill our prisons for no discernible 
     public-safety rationale.
       But now the Trump administration is pushing a misguided 
     legislative effort--likely to be voted on in the House this 
     week--that threatens to derail momentum for sentencing 
     reform. The bill is a tempting half-measure, but lawmakers 
     should resist the lure. The chance to implement real, 
     comprehensive reform may not come again any time soon.
       It's easy to miss, but the push for bipartisan sentencing 
     reform has slowly been gaining strength. It was nothing short 
     of remarkable when Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) led the 
     Senate Judiciary Committee this past February to approve a 
     measure that would revise the federal government's outdated 
     federal mandatory minimum sentences. Grassley's move--in 
     direct defiance of the administration--was the most 
     significant legislative step toward federal criminal-justice 
     reform in decades.
       Unfortunately, this progress has hit a roadblock with the 
     Trump administration's modest prison reform bill, called the 
     First Step Act. The bill seeks to improve prison conditions--
     such as by requiring that inmates be housed within 500 
     driving miles of their families and by prohibiting shackles 
     on pregnant women. It also includes education, job training 
     and other personal development programs, as well as a system 
     of incentives to participate in the programs. These narrow 
     reforms are important, but they do not require congressional 
     action, nor do they deliver the transformative change we 
     need. The only way to do that is by amending the bill to 
     include comprehensive, bipartisan sentencing reform.
       Why is this so important? The statistics are stark and, by 
     now, well-known. The United States has 5 percent of the 
     world's population, but 25 percent of its prisoners. Mass 
     incarceration is a core civil rights struggle for this 
     generation: One in three black men will be behind bars at 
     some point, a disparity that perpetuates underemployment in 
     the black community and contributes to the racial wealth gap. 
     The system is hugely expensive and ultimately unfair. And it 
     is not necessary to prevent and punish crime.
       It is impossible to right this wrong unless we send the 
     right people to prison for appropriate lengths of time. That 
     starts by making sure that federal prison sentences are smart 
     on crime rather than thoughtlessly ``tough.'' The Justice 
     Department worked toward that goal when I led the agency 
     under President Barack Obama, blunting the impact of harsh 
     mandatory minimum sentences by directing federal prosecutors 
     to seek lower charges when possible. It worked. The federal 
     prison population dropped while the nation continued to 
     experience near-record-low crime rates.
       As Grassley's support shows, this is not just a priority 
     for Democrats. He worked with Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) 
     and others to advance the Sentencing Reform and Corrections 
     Act, which would reduce some mandatory minimum sentences. The 
     bill failed in 2016 as a victim of election-year politics, 
     but when Grassley doggedly brought it up again in February, 
     it passed through the committee by a vote of 16 to 5, with 
     support from several members of his own party.
       Republicans and Democrats are enacting bold sentencing 
     reforms at the state level, too. Texas, Oklahoma and 
     Massachusetts are just a few of the states that have made 
     changes to cut back on overly punitive mandatory minimum 
     sentences.
       Unfortunately, the White House has different ideas. 
     President Trump warned of ``American carnage'' in his 
     inaugural address, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions has 
     stoked false and misleading claims of rising crime. Bowing to 
     the president's most extreme allies, the White House has put 
     forward the First Step Act, which leaves out sentencing 
     reform entirely.
       By choosing a tepid approach, the prison bill abandons 
     years of work and risks making it harder for Congress to 
     advance more serious legislation in the future. Meaningful 
     sentencing reform will be less likely to occur if the narrow 
     prison bill is enacted.
       Fortunately, lawmakers have time to change course. They can 
     ensure that any legislation includes sentencing reform, on 
     which there is such strong consensus. Progressive lawmakers 
     in particular should fight to extend, not abandon, the Obama 
     administration's criminal-justice legacy. Conservative allies 
     such as Grassley have stepped forward for a shared strategy 
     and needed policies; Democrats should stand with them.
       Nobody is under any illusions: Criminal-justice reform is 
     hard. The White House might scuttle the bill entirely, and 
     wavering members of Congress might balk. But to reform 
     America's prisons, we must change the laws that send people 
     to them in the first place. Anything less represents a 
     failure of leadership.

  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close if the other side is, 
and I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, in spite of the good intentions of this bill, I believe 
the restrictions in the incentive system it would create with respect 
to recidivism reduction programming could compound the injustices that 
occur at earlier stages of the criminal justice process; that its 
approval would lessen the odds of achieving sentencing reform; and 
that, on balance, the negatives outweigh the positives of this bill.
  A broad spectrum of dozens of civil rights and other organizations 
agree and oppose this bill, including the Leadership Conference on 
Civil and Human Rights, the ACLU, the NAACP, the NAACP Legal and 
Education Defense Fund, the American Federation of Federal Government 
Employees Council of Prison Locals, the National Immigration Law 
Center, and Human Rights Watch.
  For the reasons I have outlined today, I reluctantly oppose H.R. 5682 
and ask that my colleagues do the same.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, in closing, I urge my colleagues on the other side of 
the aisle to not oppose this very important piece of legislation before 
us today. It appears their opposition to the legislation is based upon 
what is not in the legislation rather than what is actually in it. I 
don't believe there is a single provision in the bill that they oppose.

                              {time}  1345

  In fact, many of the provisions in this bill are there because they 
specifically asked for them. For example, Democrats asked for a fix to 
the way the Bureau of Prisons calculates good time credit. We made 
changes to clarify congressional intent on that section.
  They also asked for language on the risk assessments to ensure that 
dynamic factors were used to evaluate a prisoner's risk of 
recidivating. That request was honored. Various pilot programs and a 
prohibition of shackling pregnant inmates were also placed in the 
legislation at the request of Democrats. Good requests, good changes, 
and these are only a few of the many requests that were honored.
  Voting against this meaningful and important bill is a disservice to 
those men and women currently incarcerated and their families. It is a 
disservice to those great men and women who work in our Bureau of 
Prisons, and it is a disservice to the American people.
  The vast majority of those incarcerated are going to get out one day. 
Let's make sure they have the tools and the resources to successfully 
reenter society. H.R. 5682 does just that.
  I urge my colleagues to support the FIRST STEP Act, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition of H.R. 5682, 
the FIRST STEP Act. While I support several provisions in the 
legislation, including prohibiting shackling of pregnant inmates, 
requiring that individuals be incarcerated closer to their families, 
and clarifying good time calculations, I cannot support other 
provisions of the legislation.
  I strongly believe the House should be working to ensure that once 
convicted individuals have paid their debt to society they have the 
skills and support to reintegrate into society, but this bill puts in 
place too many barriers to that goal.
  The bill excludes undocumented individuals, including those who 
remained in the United States longer than authorized from the 
recidivism reduction programming. Worse, the bill also excludes some 
lawful permanent residents from the program and could trigger their

[[Page H4319]]

removal. The bill also excludes those who have been convicted of drug 
crimes, including marijuana related convictions.
  Given that immigrant and minority communities make up a 
disproportionate share of immigration and drug related offenders in the 
criminal justice system, these exclusions will by their very nature 
exclude those who most need the benefits of the bill.
  Finally, any conversation about reducing recidivism must include 
sentencing reform that would keep low risk nonviolent offenders out of 
prison in the first place and address our draconian federal mandatory 
minimum laws.
  Mr. Speaker, we can do better, and we must do better if we are to 
address this issue.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, first I would like to acknowledge 
the gentleman from Georgia, Representative Doug Collins, and the 
gentleman from New York, Representative Hakeem Jeffries, for their hard 
work and dedication in improving this bill over the last several weeks.
  Historically, the United States of America has been plagued with 
serious, fundamental problems within our criminal justice system. For 
far too long, policymakers have chosen to play politics and disapprove 
of common-sense policy that is specifically geared towards reducing 
crime by instead enacting so-called ``tough on crime'' slogans and 
soundbites, such as ``three strikes and you're out,'' ``mandatory 
minimum sentencing,'' and even rhymes such as, ``you do the adult 
crime, you do the adult time.'' These policies may sound appealing, but 
their impact ranges from a negligible reduction in crime to an actual 
increase in crime.
  Turning to the bill we are debating today, I recognize that the FIRST 
STEP Act includes a fix to the calculation of good time credit, which I 
have sought for many years. Calculating good time credit as Congress 
had originally intended is a serious improvement made by this bill. 
This bill also improves the auditing process for enforcing the Prison 
Rape Elimination Act (PREA) to protect prisoners from sexual assault. 
It places prohibitions on shackling pregnant and post-partum women. The 
bill expands the use and transparency of compassionate release for 
terminally ill prisoners. It also requires the federal Bureau of 
Prisons to house prisoners closer to their primary residence, so they 
can maintain ties to their family and community. And there is a 
significant investment in programs designed to reduce recidivism.
  But process is essential to crafting an effective bill. There were no 
hearings on this bill. Nor has a CBO score been done. Nor has a prison 
impact analysis been prepared. And it is obvious that experts had 
little to do with drafting the bill. As a result of this process, there 
are several problems with the bill. First, the version of the bill we 
are voting on today is unnecessarily complicated by the use of a risk 
assessment tool. I have reached out to experts in the field of prison 
reform, and I have not found anyone who will say that risk assessment 
tools should be used to determine which prisoners can use time credits 
to gain early release from prison. Instead, they suggest that simply 
increasing programming for everyone will reduce recidivism and the 
complicated risk assessments are unnecessary and will stand in the way 
of reducing recidivism for many prisoners. The risk assessment process 
may also exacerbate existing racial disparities in the federal prison 
system.
  Second, experts have raised serious concerns about excluding groups 
of prisoners from this program who we know will be released from prison 
and therefore should be involved in the program.
  Third, there are questions of cost and funding. The Bureau of Prisons 
has cut contracts with halfway houses and terminated 6,000 correctional 
officers. This bill cannot achieve its goals without an adequately 
staffed prison system, as well as sufficient space at halfway houses.
  Even in the absence of hearings and experts, we can see that some of 
the opposition to this bill is almost comical, because it is lodged by 
advocates who support other legislation that carries the same 
provisions that are either similar to or worse than what they complain 
about in the FIRST STEP Act. Others oppose the bill because it does not 
include sentencing reform and therefore does not address mass 
incarceration. Unfortunately, the bill those advocates hold up as 
``sentencing reform'' fails to make any meaningful reduction in mass 
incarceration, and may in fact add to mass incarceration.
  It is in the context of this absurd process that we have to vote on 
this legislation. Unfortunately, without the appropriate analysis, we 
can only guess about its impact. Based on that guess, it is my 
determination that no prisoner will be worse off, but many may be 
significantly better off, under the FIRST STEP Act. I expect that 
public safety will be enhanced by this bill, because more people will 
receive programming to reduce their likelihood to commit future crimes. 
Although this is a shameful process, I will therefore support the bill.
  Mr. Speaker, as the process moves forward, I hope that the sponsors 
of this legislation will continue to improve it, based on evidence and 
research.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today the House is 
expected to consider H.R. 5682--the Formerly Incarcerated Reenter 
Society Transformed Safely Transitioning Every Person Act or FIRST STEP 
Act. This bill represents a good faith effort to improve the 
reintegration of incarcerated individuals back into their communities 
and reduce recidivism. In this political climate, we must always strive 
to achieve meaningful reforms wherever possible. I believe that the 
FIRST STEP Act will do just that and I intend to vote for this measure 
when it is considered on the floor.
  I acknowledge that this is not a perfect bill. Very few are, if any. 
However, the STEP Act will offer a new opportunity for incarcerated 
individuals to participate in evidence-based programming to reduce 
their likelihood of recidivism. It is a bill that is supported by 
prominent civil rights and criminal justice reform organizations such 
as the National Urban League and the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition. 
It passed the House Judiciary Committee on a 25-5 vote, and I feel even 
more confidently about its passage on the House floor.
  Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that this Congress can do more to not 
only reduce recidivism through ``back-end reform,'' but also engage in 
``front-end reform'' to keep individuals out of prison in the first 
place. However, we must consider a bill entirely on its merits and not 
just oppose a measure because it does not go far enough in its reforms. 
The FIRST STEP Act is exactly that--a first step to make meaningful and 
impactful changes to our prison system.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5682, 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. GOODLATTE. 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, further 
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

                          ____________________