[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 118 (Monday, July 22, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H4656-H4658]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FOREIGN EXTORTION PREVENTION TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS ACT
Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(S. 4548) to make a technical correction to the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 by repealing section 5101 and
enacting an updated version of the Foreign Extortion Prevention Act.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
S. 4548
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Foreign Extortion Prevention
Technical Corrections Act''.
SEC. 2. TECHNICAL CORRECTION TO 2024 NDAA.
(a) Repeal of Previous Version of FEPA.--Section 5101 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024
(Public Law 118-31) is repealed, and each provision of law
amended by that section is
[[Page H4657]]
amended to read as it read on the day before the date of
enactment of that Act.
(b) Prohibition of Demand for Bribe.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 63 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 1352. Demands by foreign officials for bribes
``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Foreign official.--The term `foreign official'
means--
``(A)(i) any official or employee of a foreign government
or any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof; or
``(ii) any senior foreign political figure, as defined in
section 1010.605 of title 31, Code of Federal Regulations, or
any successor regulation;
``(B) any official or employee of a public international
organization;
``(C) any person acting in an official capacity for or on
behalf of--
``(i) a government, department, agency, or instrumentality
described in subparagraph (A)(i); or
``(ii) a public international organization.
``(2) Public international organization.--The term `public
international organization' means--
``(A) an organization that is designated by Executive order
pursuant to section 1 of the International Organizations
Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288); or
``(B) any other international organization that is
designated by the President by Executive order for the
purposes of this section, effective as of the date of
publication of the order in the Federal Register.
``(b) Prohibition of Demand for a Bribe.--
``(1) Offense.--It shall be unlawful for any foreign
official or person selected to be a foreign official to
corruptly demand, seek, receive, accept, or agree to receive
or accept, directly or indirectly, anything of value
personally or for any other person or nongovernmental entity,
by making use of the mails or any means or instrumentality of
interstate commerce--
``(A) from--
``(i) any person (as defined in section 104A of the Foreign
Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (15 U.S.C. 78dd-3), except that
that definition shall be applied without regard to whether
the person is an offender) while the foreign official or
person selected to be a foreign official, or a person acting
on behalf of the foreign official or person selected to be a
foreign official, is in the territory of the United States;
``(ii) an issuer (as defined in section 3(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c(a))), or any
officer, director, employee, or agent of an issuer or any
stockholder thereof acting on behalf of the issuer; or
``(iii) a domestic concern (as defined in section 104 of
the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (15 U.S.C. 78dd-
2)), or any officer, director, employee, or agent of a
domestic concern or any stockholder thereof acting on behalf
of the domestic concern; and
``(B) in return for--
``(i) being influenced in the performance of any act or
decision of the foreign official or person selected to be a
foreign official in the official capacity of the foreign
official or person selected to be a foreign official;
``(ii) being induced to do or omit to do any act in
violation of the lawful duty of the foreign official or
person selected to be a foreign official;
``(iii) conferring any improper advantage; or
``(iv) using the influence of the foreign official or
person selected to be a foreign official with a foreign
government or instrumentality thereof to affect or influence
any act or decision of that government or instrumentality,
in connection with obtaining or retaining business for or
with, or directing business to, any person.
``(2) Penalties.--Any person who violates paragraph (1)
shall be fined not more than $250,000 or 3 times the monetary
equivalent of the thing of value, imprisoned for not more
than 15 years, or both.
``(3) Jurisdiction.--An offense under paragraph (1) shall
be subject to extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction.
``(4) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this section, and annually thereafter, the
Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretary of State
as relevant, shall submit to the Committee on the Judiciary
and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the
Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on Foreign
Affairs of the House of Representatives, and post on the
publicly available website of the Department of Justice, a
report--
``(A) focusing, in part, on demands by foreign officials
for bribes from entities domiciled or incorporated in the
United States, and the efforts of foreign governments to
prosecute such cases;
``(B) addressing United States diplomatic efforts to
protect entities domiciled or incorporated in the United
States from foreign bribery, and the effectiveness of those
efforts in protecting such entities;
``(C) summarizing major actions taken under this section in
the previous year, including enforcement actions taken and
penalties imposed;
``(D) evaluating the effectiveness of the Department of
Justice in enforcing this section; and
``(E) detailing what resources or legislative action the
Department of Justice needs to ensure adequate enforcement of
this section.
``(5) Rule of construction.--This subsection shall not be
construed as encompassing conduct that would violate section
30A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78dd-1)
or section 104 or 104A of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
of 1977 (15 U.S.C. 78dd-2; 15 U.S.C. 78dd-3) whether pursuant
to a theory of direct liability, conspiracy, complicity, or
otherwise.''.
(2) Technical and conforming amendment.--The table of
sections for chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``1352. Demands by foreign officials for bribes.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Issa) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
General Leave
Mr. ISSA. 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 material on S. 4548.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, S. 4548 makes technical and conforming changes to the
Foreign Extortion Prevention Act, which was enacted as part of last
year's National Defense Authorization Act.
The FEPA was introduced to create a Federal offense that would
contemplate a Foreign Corruption Practices Act. Again, the Foreign
Corruption Practices Act, which has been in place for many years, is
the act that the American people rely on to make sure that Americans,
no matter where they are doing business, abide by U.S. practices, no
bribes, and no mislaid funds. In fact, it is the reason that the United
States is the envy of the world when it comes to contracting with our
companies.
While the FCPA prohibits the paying of a bribe to a foreign official,
the FEPA prohibits the demanding of a bribe by a foreign official.
However, the FEPA text that was enacted last year in the NDAA had
several flaws.
First, the law was added to the domestic bribery statute in title 18,
creating an inconsistency in the sections that are being defined in the
elements of the crime. These inconsistencies may prevent the FEPA and
the domestic bribery statute from operating in the way that Congress
intended.
Second, there were inconsistencies between the language of the FCPA
and the FEPA. Because these statutes are intended to be complementary,
with parts of them addressing the same problem, we need to harmonize
it.
For that reason, this technical and conforming change has been
brought to the committee's attention. We stand for it, we have reviewed
it, and in fact, we hope that all will vote on it.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 4548, the Foreign
Extortion Prevention Technical Corrections Act.
Last year, we enacted the Foreign Extortion Prevention Act, or FEPA,
landmark legislation that would combat kleptocracy and help protect the
rule of law.
FEPA was the first expansion of our country's antibribery and
anticorruption laws in nearly 50 years. This law provides another
useful tool to combat corruption and stop it at its source by making it
a crime for any foreign official to solicit or accept a bribe from any
American person or American company.
It was already the law that U.S. persons who offer to pay bribes
overseas could be prosecuted, but there was no corresponding law
prohibiting foreign entities and officials from demanding or accepting
bribes.
Foreign corrupt officials too often demand bribes from companies
hoping to do business with them. This unethical practice unfairly
benefits dishonest companies, granting them a competitive advantage,
and placing law-abiding companies and citizens, including American
ones, at a disadvantage.
FEPA changed that by stopping corruption at its source. The passage
of FEPA was a watershed moment for our
[[Page H4658]]
democracy, particularly because research shows that the vast majority
of bribe-demanding foreign officials never face consequences in their
own countries. FEPA makes it much harder for these foreign officials to
cultivate a culture where corruption and bribery are the norm.
After FEPA was enacted into law, it became clear that certain
technical corrections were necessary to fully effectuate the law. This
legislation would make those necessary changes to ensure that our fight
to end corruption is well equipped. I was proud to vote for FEPA last
year, and I am proud to vote for it again through this bill.
I must observe that consideration of this bill is bittersweet today
because the House sponsor of FEPA was our late, beloved colleague,
Sheila Jackson Lee, who we lost just this past weekend.
Her impact on this Chamber was immeasurable, and she was the champion
of so many issues from criminal justice to voting rights to civil
rights and civil liberties and so much more.
She was also passionate about fighting against corruption, both at
home and abroad, and passage of today's bill would be a small tribute
to the mark that she has left on this country and on all of us.
This legislation simply makes technical corrections to the Foreign
Extortion Prevention Act, important bipartisan anticorruption
legislation, which was enacted last year. This bill has already passed
the Senate.
I urge all Members to support the bill and send it to the President's
desk, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, the bill before us isn't just another example of the
hardworking Sheila Jackson Lee that both of us served with for more
than two decades.
In closing, I take a moment to pay tribute to the gentlewoman, not on
my side of the aisle, not always on my side of a vote, but never has
our committee had a harder working, more dedicated Member, a Member who
I had the honor of traveling with to many places, including the Middle
East, Africa, and elsewhere.
She would get up early. She would work late. She would add meetings
on top of meetings, even on congressional delegations that seemed to be
filled beyond the possibility of doing it all.
I don't remember a piece of legislation on which she wasn't prepared
to opine with accuracy and proper briefing, and I don't remember an
opportunity missed to offer an amendment or a need for greater
transparency.
I join my colleague, Mr. Nadler, in saying she will be missed. She
will be missed because nobody could have had somebody more interested
in transparency, in proper reporting, and quite frankly, the importance
of this body. She was a person of the House, and she will be missed.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support and yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Issa) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, S. 4548.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________