[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 10798-10807]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



 TRADE AGENCY AUTHORIZATIONS, DRUG FREE BORDERS, AND PREVENTION OF ON-
                   LINE CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ACT OF 1999

  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill 
(H.R. 1833) to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2000 and 2001 
for the United States Customs Service for drug interdiction and other 
operations, for the Office of the United States Trade Representative, 
for the United States International Trade Commission, and for other 
purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 1833

       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 ``Trade Agency Authorizations, 
     Drug Free Borders, and Prevention of On-Line Child 
     Pornography Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.

                 TITLE I--UNITED STATES CUSTOMS SERVICE

  Subtitle A--Drug Enforcement and Other Noncommercial and Commercial 
                               Operations

Sec. 101. Authorization of appropriations for noncommercial operations, 
              commercial operations, and air and marine interdiction.
Sec. 102. Illicit narcotics detection equipment for the United States-
              Mexico border, United States-Canada border, and Florida 
              and the Gulf Coast seaports.
Sec. 103. Peak hours and investigative resource enhancement for the 
              United States-Mexico and United States-Canada borders.
Sec. 104. Compliance with performance plan requirements.

    Subtitle B--Child Cyber-Smuggling Center of the Customs Service

Sec. 111. Authorization of appropriations for program to prevent child 
              pornography/child sexual exploitation.

                    Subtitle C--Personnel Provisions

 Chapter 1--Overtime And Premium Pay of Officers of the Customs Service

Sec. 121. Correction relating to fiscal year cap.
Sec. 122. Correction relating to overtime pay.
Sec. 123. Correction relating to premium pay.
Sec. 124. Use of savings from payment of overtime and premium pay for 
              additional overtime enforcement activities of the Customs 
              Service.
Sec. 125. Effective date.

                  Chapter 2--Miscellaneous Provisions

Sec. 131. Study and report relating to personnel practices of the 
              Customs Service.

       TITLE II--OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

Sec. 201. Authorization of appropriations.

        TITLE III--UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

Sec. 301. Authorization of appropriations.

                 TITLE I--UNITED STATES CUSTOMS SERVICE

  Subtitle A--Drug Enforcement and Other Noncommercial and Commercial 
                               Operations

     SEC. 101. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR NONCOMMERCIAL 
                   OPERATIONS, COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS, AND AIR AND 
                   MARINE INTERDICTION.

       (a) Noncommercial Operations.--Section 301(b)(1) of the 
     Customs Procedural Reform and Simplification Act of 1978 (19 
     U.S.C. 2075(b)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A) to read as follows:
       ``(A) $999,563,000 for fiscal year 2000.''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (B) to read as follows:
       ``(B) $996,464,000 for fiscal year 2001.''.
       (b) Commercial Operations.--
       (1) In general.--Section 301(b)(2)(A) of the Customs 
     Procedural Reform and Simplification Act of 1978 (19 U.S.C. 
     2075(b)(2)(A)) is amended--
       (A) in clause (i) to read as follows:
       ``(i) $1,154,359,000 for fiscal year 2000.''; and
       (B) in clause (ii) to read as follows:
       ``(ii) $1,194,534,000 for fiscal year 2001.''.
       (2) Reports.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, and not later than each subsequent 90-
     day period, the Commissioner of Customs shall prepare and 
     submit to the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate a 
     report demonstrating that the development and establishment 
     of the automated commercial environment computer system is 
     being carried out in a cost-effective manner and meets the 
     modernization requirements of title VI of the North American 
     Free Trade Agreements Implementation Act.
       (c) Air and Marine Interdiction.--Section 301(b)(3) of the 
     Customs Procedural Reform and Simplification Act of 1978 (19 
     U.S.C. 2075(b)(3)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A) to read as follows:
       ``(A) $109,413,000 for fiscal year 2000.''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (B) to read as follows:
       ``(B) $113,789,000 for fiscal year 2001.''.
       (d) Submission of Out-Year Budget Projections.--Section 
     301(a) of the Customs Procedural Reform and Simplification 
     Act of 1978 (19 U.S.C. 2075(a)) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(3) By no later than the date on which the President 
     submits to the Congress the budget of the United States 
     Government for a fiscal year, the Commissioner of Customs 
     shall submit to the Committee on Ways and Means of the House 
     of Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate 
     the projected amount of funds for the succeeding fiscal year 
     that will be necessary for the operations of the Customs 
     Service as provided for in subsection (b).''.

     SEC. 102. ILLICIT NARCOTICS DETECTION EQUIPMENT FOR THE 
                   UNITED STATES-MEXICO BORDER, UNITED STATES-
                   CANADA BORDER, AND FLORIDA AND THE GULF COAST 
                   SEAPORTS.

       (a) Fiscal Year 2000.--Of the amounts made available for 
     fiscal year 2000 under section 301(b)(1)(A) of the Customs 
     Procedural Reform and Simplification Act of 1978 (19 U.S.C. 
     2075(b)(1)(A)), as amended by section 101(a) of this Act, 
     $90,244,000 shall be available until expended for acquisition 
     and other expenses associated with implementation and 
     deployment of illicit narcotics detection

[[Page 10799]]

     equipment along the United States-Mexico border, the United 
     States-Canada border, and Florida and the Gulf Coast 
     seaports, as follows:
       (1) United states-mexico border.--For the United States-
     Mexico border, the following:
       (A) $6,000,000 for 8 Vehicle and Container Inspection 
     Systems (VACIS).
       (B) $11,200,000 for 5 mobile truck x-rays with transmission 
     and backscatter imaging.
       (C) $13,000,000 for the upgrade of 8 fixed-site truck x-
     rays from the present energy level of 450,000 electron volts 
     to 1,000,000 electron volts (1-MeV).
       (D) $7,200,000 for 8 1-MeV pallet x-rays.
       (E) $1,000,000 for 200 portable contraband detectors 
     (busters) to be distributed among ports where the current 
     allocations are inadequate.
       (F) $600,000 for 50 contraband detection kits to be 
     distributed among all southwest border ports based on traffic 
     volume.
       (G) $500,000 for 25 ultrasonic container inspection units 
     to be distributed among all ports receiving liquid-filled 
     cargo and to ports with a hazardous material inspection 
     facility.
       (H) $2,450,000 for 7 automated targeting systems.
       (I) $360,000 for 30 rapid tire deflator systems to be 
     distributed to those ports where port runners are a threat.
       (J) $480,000 for 20 portable Treasury Enforcement 
     Communications Systems (TECS) terminals to be moved among 
     ports as needed.
       (K) $1,000,000 for 20 remote watch surveillance camera 
     systems at ports where there are suspicious activities at 
     loading docks, vehicle queues, secondary inspection lanes, or 
     areas where visual surveillance or observation is obscured.
       (L) $1,254,000 for 57 weigh-in-motion sensors to be 
     distributed among the ports with the greatest volume of 
     outbound traffic.
       (M) $180,000 for 36 AM traffic information radio stations, 
     with 1 station to be located at each border crossing.
       (N) $1,040,000 for 260 inbound vehicle counters to be 
     installed at every inbound vehicle lane.
       (O) $950,000 for 38 spotter camera systems to counter the 
     surveillance of customs inspection activities by persons 
     outside the boundaries of ports where such surveillance 
     activities are occurring.
       (P) $390,000 for 60 inbound commercial truck transponders 
     to be distributed to all ports of entry.
       (Q) $1,600,000 for 40 narcotics vapor and particle 
     detectors to be distributed to each border crossing.
       (R) $400,000 for license plate reader automatic targeting 
     software to be installed at each port to target inbound 
     vehicles.
       (2) United states-canada border.--For the United States-
     Canada border, the following:
       (A) $3,000,000 for 4 Vehicle and Container Inspection 
     Systems (VACIS).
       (B) $8,800,000 for 4 mobile truck x-rays with transmission 
     and backscatter imaging.
       (C) $3,600,000 for 4 1-MeV pallet x-rays.
       (D) $250,000 for 50 portable contraband detectors (busters) 
     to be distributed among ports where the current allocations 
     are inadequate.
       (E) $300,000 for 25 contraband detection kits to be 
     distributed among ports based on traffic volume.
       (F) $240,000 for 10 portable Treasury Enforcement 
     Communications Systems (TECS) terminals to be moved among 
     ports as needed.
       (G) $400,000 for 10 narcotics vapor and particle detectors 
     to be distributed to each border crossing based on traffic 
     volume.
       (3) Florida and gulf coast seaports.--For Florida and the 
     Gulf Coast seaports, the following:
       (A) $4,500,000 for 6 Vehicle and Container Inspection 
     Systems (VACIS).
       (B) $11,800,000 for 5 mobile truck x-rays with transmission 
     and backscatter imaging.
       (C) $7,200,000 for 8 1-MeV pallet x-rays.
       (D) $250,000 for 50 portable contraband detectors (busters) 
     to be distributed among ports where the current allocations 
     are inadequate.
       (E) $300,000 for 25 contraband detection kits to be 
     distributed among ports based on traffic volume.
       (b) Fiscal Year 2001.--Of the amounts made available for 
     fiscal year 2001 under section 301(b)(1)(B) of the Customs 
     Procedural Reform and Simplification Act of 1978 (19 U.S.C. 
     2075(b)(1)(B)), as amended by section 101(a) of this Act, 
     $8,924,500 shall be available until expended for the 
     maintenance and support of the equipment and training of 
     personnel to maintain and support the equipment described in 
     subsection (a).
       (c) Acquisition of Technologically Superior Equipment; 
     Transfer of Funds.--
       (1) In general.--The Commissioner of Customs may use 
     amounts made available for fiscal year 2000 under section 
     301(b)(1)(A) of the Customs Procedural Reform and 
     Simplification Act of 1978 (19 U.S.C. 2075(b)(1)(A)), as 
     amended by section 101(a) of this Act, for the acquisition of 
     equipment other than the equipment described in subsection 
     (a) if such other equipment--
       (A)(i) is technologically superior to the equipment 
     described in subsection (a); and
       (ii) will achieve at least the same results at a cost that 
     is the same or less than the equipment described in 
     subsection (a); or
       (B) can be obtained at a lower cost than the equipment 
     described in subsection (a).
       (2) Transfer of funds.--Notwithstanding any other provision 
     of this section, the Commissioner of Customs may reallocate 
     an amount not to exceed 10 percent of--
       (A) the amount specified in any of subparagraphs (A) 
     through (R) of subsection (a)(1) for equipment specified in 
     any other of such subparagraphs (A) through (R);
       (B) the amount specified in any of subparagraphs (A) 
     through (G) of subsection (a)(2) for equipment specified in 
     any other of such subparagraphs (A) through (G); and
       (C) the amount specified in any of subparagraphs (A) 
     through (E) of subsection (a)(3) for equipment specified in 
     any other of such subparagraphs (A) through (E).

     SEC. 103. PEAK HOURS AND INVESTIGATIVE RESOURCE ENHANCEMENT 
                   FOR THE UNITED STATES-MEXICO AND UNITED STATES-
                   CANADA BORDERS.

       Of the amounts made available for fiscal years 2000 and 
     2001 under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 301(b)(1) of 
     the Customs Procedural Reform and Simplification Act of 1978 
     (19 U.S.C. 2075(b)(1)(A) and (B)), as amended by section 
     101(a) of this Act, $127,644,584 for fiscal year 2000 and 
     $184,110,928 for fiscal year 2001 shall be available for the 
     following:
       (1) A net increase of 535 inspectors, 120 special agents, 
     and 10 intelligence analysts for the United States-Mexico 
     border and 375 inspectors for the United States-Canada 
     border, in order to open all primary lanes on such borders 
     during peak hours and enhance investigative resources.
       (2) A net increase of 285 inspectors and canine enforcement 
     officers to be distributed at large cargo facilities as 
     needed to process and screen cargo (including rail cargo) and 
     reduce commercial waiting times on the United States-Mexico 
     border.
       (3) A net increase of 40 inspectors at sea ports in 
     southeast Florida to process and screen cargo.
       (4) A net increase of 300 special agents, 30 intelligence 
     analysts, and additional resources to be distributed among 
     offices that have jurisdiction over major metropolitan drug 
     or narcotics distribution and transportation centers for 
     intensification of efforts against drug smuggling and money-
     laundering organizations.
       (5) A net increase of 50 positions and additional resources 
     to the Office of Internal Affairs to enhance investigative 
     resources for anticorruption efforts.
       (6) The costs incurred as a result of the increase in 
     personnel hired pursuant to this section.

     SEC. 104. COMPLIANCE WITH PERFORMANCE PLAN REQUIREMENTS.

       As part of the annual performance plan for each of the 
     fiscal years 2000 and 2001 covering each program activity set 
     forth in the budget of the United States Customs Service, as 
     required under section 1115 of title 31, United States Code, 
     the Commissioner of the Customs Service shall establish 
     performance goals, performance indicators, and comply with 
     all other requirements contained in paragraphs (1) through 
     (6) of subsection (a) of such section with respect to each of 
     the activities to be carried out pursuant to sections 111 and 
     112 of this Act.

    Subtitle B--Child Cyber-Smuggling Center of the Customs Service

     SEC. 111. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR PROGRAM TO 
                   PREVENT CHILD PORNOGRAPHY/CHILD SEXUAL 
                   EXPLOITATION.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Customs Service $10,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2000 to carry out the program to prevent child 
     pornography/child sexual exploitation established by the 
     Child Cyber-Smuggling Center of the Customs Service.
       (b) Use of Amounts for Child Pornography Cyber Tipline.--Of 
     the amount appropriated under subsection (a), the Customs 
     Service shall provide 3.75 percent of such amount to the 
     National Center for Missing and Exploited Children for the 
     operation of the child pornography cyber tipline of the 
     Center and for increased public awareness of the tipline.

                    Subtitle C--Personnel Provisions

 CHAPTER 1--OVERTIME AND PREMIUM PAY OF OFFICERS OF THE CUSTOMS SERVICE

     SEC. 121. CORRECTION RELATING TO FISCAL YEAR CAP.

       Section 5(c)(1) of the Act of February 13, 1911 (19 U.S.C. 
     267(c)(1)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) Fiscal year cap.--The aggregate of overtime pay under 
     subsection (a) (including commuting compensation under 
     subsection (a)(2)(B)) that a customs officer may be paid in 
     any fiscal year may not exceed $30,000, except that--
       ``(A) the Commissioner of Customs or his or her designee 
     may waive this limitation in individual cases in order to 
     prevent excessive costs or to meet emergency requirements of 
     the Customs Service; and
       ``(B) upon certification by the Commissioner of Customs to 
     the Chairmen of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House 
     of Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate 
     that the Customs Service has in operation a system that 
     provides

[[Page 10800]]

     accurate and reliable data on a daily basis on overtime and 
     premium pay that is being paid to customs officers, the 
     Commissioner is authorized to pay any customs officer for one 
     work assignment that would result in the overtime pay of that 
     officer exceeding the $30,000 limitation imposed by this 
     paragraph, in addition to any overtime pay that may be 
     received pursuant to a waiver under subparagraph (A).''.

     SEC. 122. CORRECTION RELATING TO OVERTIME PAY.

       Section 5(a)(1) of the Act of February 13, 1911 (19 U.S.C. 
     267(a)(1)), is amended by inserting after the first sentence 
     the following new sentences: ``Overtime pay provided under 
     this subsection shall not be paid to any customs officer 
     unless such officer actually performed work during the time 
     corresponding to such overtime pay. The preceding sentence 
     shall not apply with respect to the payment of an award or 
     settlement to a customs officer who was unable to perform 
     overtime work as a result of a personnel action in violation 
     of section 5596 of title 5, United States Code, section 6(d) 
     of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, or title VII of the 
     Civil Rights Act of 1964.''.

     SEC. 123. CORRECTION RELATING TO PREMIUM PAY.

       (a) In General.--Section 5(b)(4) of the Act of February 13, 
     1911 (19 U.S.C. 267(b)(4)), is amended by adding after the 
     first sentence the following new sentences: ``Premium pay 
     provided under this subsection shall not be paid to any 
     customs officer unless such officer actually performed work 
     during the time corresponding to such premium pay. The 
     preceding sentence shall not apply with respect to the 
     payment of an award or settlement to a customs officer who 
     was unable to perform work during the time described in the 
     preceding sentence as a result of a personnel action in 
     violation of section 5596 of title 5, United States Code, 
     section 6(d) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, or 
     title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.''.
       (b) Corrections Relating to Night Work Differential Pay.--
     Section 5(b)(1) of such Act (19 U.S.C. 267(b)(1)) is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(1) Night work differential.--
       ``(A) 6 p.m. to midnight.--If any hours of regularly 
     scheduled work of a customs officer occur during the hours of 
     6 p.m. and 12 a.m., the officer is entitled to pay for such 
     hours of work (except for work to which paragraph (2) or (3) 
     applies) at the officer's hourly rate of basic pay plus 
     premium pay amounting to 15 percent of that basic rate.
       ``(B) Midnight to 6 a.m.--If any hours of regularly 
     scheduled work of a customs officer occur during the hours of 
     12 a.m. and 6 a.m., the officer is entitled to pay for such 
     hours of work (except for work to which paragraph (2) or (3) 
     applies) at the officer's hourly rate of basic pay plus 
     premium pay amounting to 20 percent of that basic rate.
       ``(C) Midnight to 8 a.m.--If the regularly scheduled work 
     of a customs officer is 12 a.m. to 8:00 a.m., the officer is 
     entitled to pay for work during such period (except for work 
     to which paragraph (2) or (3) applies) at the officer's 
     hourly rate of basic pay plus premium pay amounting to 20 
     percent of that basic rate.''.

     SEC. 124. USE OF SAVINGS FROM PAYMENT OF OVERTIME AND PREMIUM 
                   PAY FOR ADDITIONAL OVERTIME ENFORCEMENT 
                   ACTIVITIES OF THE CUSTOMS SERVICE.

       Section 5 of the Act of February 13, 1911 (19 U.S.C. 267), 
     is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
       ``(e) Use of Savings From Payment of Overtime and Premium 
     Pay for Additional Overtime Enforcement Activities.--
       ``(1) Use of amounts.--For fiscal year 1999 and each 
     subsequent fiscal year, the Secretary of the Treasury--
       ``(A) shall determine under paragraph (2) the amount of 
     savings from the payment of overtime and premium pay to 
     customs officers; and
       ``(B) shall use an amount from the Customs User Fee Account 
     equal to such amount determined under paragraph (2) for 
     additional overtime enforcement activities of the Customs 
     Service.
       ``(2) Determination of savings amount.--For each fiscal 
     year, the Secretary shall calculate an amount equal to the 
     difference between--
       ``(A) the estimated cost for overtime and premium pay that 
     would have been incurred during that fiscal year if this 
     section, as in effect on the day before the date of the 
     enactment of sections 122 and 123 of the Trade Agency 
     Authorization, Drug Free Borders, and Prevention of On-Line 
     Child Pornography Act of 1999, had governed such costs; and
       ``(B) the actual cost for overtime and premium pay that is 
     incurred during that fiscal year under this section, as 
     amended by sections 122 and 123 of the Trade Agency 
     Authorization, Drug Free Borders, and Prevention of On-Line 
     Child Pornography Act of 1999.''.

     SEC. 125. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       This chapter, and the amendments made by this chapter, 
     shall apply with respect to pay periods beginning on or after 
     15 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

                  CHAPTER 2--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

     SEC. 131. STUDY AND REPORT RELATING TO PERSONNEL PRACTICES OF 
                   THE CUSTOMS SERVICE.

       (a) Study.--The Commissioner of Customs shall conduct a 
     study of current personnel practices of the Customs Service, 
     including an overview of performance standards and the effect 
     and impact of the collective bargaining process on drug 
     interdiction efforts of the Customs Service and a comparison 
     of duty rotation policies of the Customs Service and other 
     Federal agencies that employ similarly-situated personnel.
       (b) Report.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Commissioner of Customs shall 
     submit to the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate a 
     report containing the results of the study conducted under 
     subsection (a).

       TITLE II--OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

     SEC. 201. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 141(g)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974 
     (19 U.S.C. 2171(g)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)--
       (A) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking ``not 
     to exceed the following'' and inserting ``as follows'';
       (B) in clause (i) to read as follows:
       ``(i) $26,501,000 for fiscal year 2000.''; and
       (C) in clause (ii) to read as follows:
       ``(ii) $26,501,000 for fiscal year 2001.''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (B)--
       (A) in clause (i), by adding ``and'' at the end;
       (B) by striking clause (ii); and
       (C) by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (ii).
       (b) Submission of Out-Year Budget Projections.--Section 
     141(g) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2171(g)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) By no later than the date on which the President 
     submits to the Congress the budget of the United States 
     Government for a fiscal year, the United States Trade 
     Representative shall submit to the Committee on Ways and 
     Means of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 
     Finance of the Senate the projected amount of funds for the 
     succeeding fiscal year that will be necessary for the Office 
     to carry out its functions.''.

        TITLE III--UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

     SEC. 301. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 330(e)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act of 
     1930 (19 U.S.C. 1330(e)(2)) is amended--
       (1) in clause (i) to read as follows:
       ``(i) $47,200,000 for fiscal year 2000.''; and
       (2) in clause (ii) to read as follows:
       ``(ii) $49,750,000 for fiscal year 2001.''.
       (b) Submission of Out-Year Budget Projections.--Section 
     330(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1330(e)(2)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) By no later than the date on which the President 
     submits to the Congress the budget of the United States 
     Government for a fiscal year, the Commission shall submit to 
     the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate 
     the projected amount of funds for the succeeding fiscal year 
     that will be necessary for the Commission to carry out its 
     functions.''.

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


                             General Leave

  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 
5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on H.R. 1833.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1833, the Trade Agency Authorizations, Drug Free 
Borders, and Prevention of On-Line Child Pornography Act of 1999 
contains budget authorizations for the United States Customs Service, 
the Office of the United States Trade Representative and the 
International Trade Commission. H.R. 1833 also reforms Customs 
inspectors overtime and shift differential pay.
  H.R. 1833 passed the committee unanimously by a vote of 36-0.
  H.R. 1833 authorizes the President's budget request for USTR and the 
ITC, but goes beyond the President's request for the Customs Service in 
order to provide more funding for drug interdiction, child pornography 
prevention initiatives and Customs automation.

[[Page 10801]]

  Illegal drugs are killing our youths. Sex predators stalk our 
children on the Internet. We must protect our children from the scourge 
of illegal drugs and on-line sex predators. H.R. 1833 aims to do just 
that.
  Today is Missing Child Day. It is tragic that we need to recognize 
such a day. H.R. 1833 would authorize $10 million for the Customs 
Cyber-smuggling Center so that customs can step up protection of our 
children from on-line predators and pedophiles. Part of this 
authorization would go to the National Center for Missing and Exploited 
Children's cyber tipline that handles calls and on-line reports of 
sexual exploitation of children.
  While I am on this portion of the bill, I would like to pay tribute 
to the distinguished gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) 
because she was the one that was in the vanguard of incorporating these 
provisions dealing with trying to monitor pornography on the Internet. 
She deserves the overwhelming credit of one and all on a bipartisan 
basis for her work. She will elaborate more fully later.
  H.R. 1833 also includes more than $400 million over the President's 
budget request for drug interdiction in fiscal year 2000 and fiscal 
year 2001. This funding would allow Customs to purchase drug detection 
equipment and hire additional inspectors to keep illegal drugs from 
crossing our borders into our children's hands.
  Customs must also keep our trade moving smoothly. Customs current 
Automated Commercial System, ACS, is 16 years old and on the brink of 
continual brownouts and shutdowns. This costs the American taxpayer 
millions of dollars. Customs has begun building a new system, Automated 
Commercial Environment, ACE, but the President did not see fit to 
request funding for ACE for fiscal year 2000. Instead, the President 
requested a fee that the administration did not justify. The American 
public cannot wait for the President, so Congress must take action. 
H.R. 1833 does just that. It authorizes $150 million for ACE in fiscal 
year 2000 and fiscal year 2001.
  H.R. 1833 also makes common-sense changes to Customs officers 
overtime pay and nighttime pay. The legislation maintains, and even 
increases, some benefits to Customs inspectors in recognition of their 
hard work and the valuable services they perform.

                              {time}  1100

  The revisions also correct some anomalies in Customs officers' 
overtime and differential pay. Under H.R. 1833, officers would be paid 
overtime only for overtime hours worked. Also, officers would be paid 
shift differential only for night work instead of daytime work under 
the present system. This saves the American taxpayer money.
  In short, this legislation will help prevent illegal drugs from 
crossing our borders, prevent on-line child pornography, prevent waste 
of taxpayers' dollars and prevent delays in moving our trade.
  Finally, I note that at the request of the chairman of the Committee 
on Government Reform and Oversight we had to drop a provision in the 
bill that would put the Commissioner of Customs at the same pay level 
as other Treasury Department bureau heads. That provision is the only 
provision within the jurisdiction of that committee.
  In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this 
package and pass this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this suspension procedure that we use in the House is 
supposed to be reserved for bills that are not controversial. Where 
there is controversy in the committee or subcommittee, members of the 
minority and the majority should have an opportunity to at least 
discuss those issues and vote on those issues.
  Today we see a violation, a real violation, of that principle, 
because here we find a good bill, a bill there that is supposed to 
support the United States Trade Represenative's Office, the 
International Trade Commission, a bill that the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) worked so hard on to prevent child 
pornography, which all of us find repugnant to everything that we 
believe in as Americans, as human beings, and we find a real attack 
against drug trafficking by providing sophisticated equipment for those 
men and women who have dedicated themselves to protect our borders 
against these drugs coming into the United States.
  Why in God's name then, Mr. Speaker, do we find on the suspension 
calendar, incorporated in this bill, that which prevents us from 
debating, prevents us from voting for it, a provision that nobody wants 
except one or two people in the majority on the committee? Where did it 
come from? Where did it start? Where were the hearings? Where was the 
reports? Where is the evidence that indicated that Customs inspectors 
were overpaid?
  It certainly did not come from hearings which we had on this issue 
before we voted on this, and even when we were marking up the bill, the 
only evidence we had was a staff member from the majority giving us 
information that was not available through any official report. Here we 
have Customs officials that put their lives on the line each and every 
day protecting our borders; three were killed in the line of duty. They 
fight every day, they struggle every day, and the commissioner and the 
unions were never discussed on this issue, but somebody knew better 
than them on the committee and revised it because they did not like the 
wording of it in the regulation.
  It is not fair, Mr. Speaker, and it comes almost close to being 
illegal, to fold something like that, a controversial subject like 
that, into a bill that no one politically is prepared to vote against 
on the suspension calendar for fear that we would be supporting child 
pornography, that we would be supporting drug trafficking, that we 
would not support the USTR and the ITC.
  There is no excuse for this being included in this bill. It divided 
our committee, it divides our subcommittee, and it is things like this 
that cause divisions in the House of Representatives.
  We knew why these people were paid overtime pay, we know the reasons 
they were done, and it is because, unlike other federal law enforcement 
officers, the Customs do not give and we did not provide the same type 
of benefits that law enforcement officials get. They do not get the 20-
year pension retirement, they do not get a whole lot of perks that law 
enforcement officials get, and this was folded into their pay in order 
to compensate for the fact that some do law enforcement work and they 
do not get paid law enforcement salaries.
  Was it controversial? Ask anybody on the majority whether it was 
controversial. So, why should it be included in this suspension 
calendar in a bill that certainly is without controversy? I suspect it 
is because they once again want to deny us the opportunity to 
reconsider the amendment that was offered in committee and deny us the 
opportunity to be able to vote on this issue singularly, like it should 
be.
  I know that the Committee on Ways and Means has traditionally enjoyed 
closed rules when it comes to the House, but this is not a tax issue, 
and this is not an issue that is coming to the House in regular form. 
It comes to us as a suspension bill, and I am really disappointed that 
my committee would see fit to fold a controversial subject into a 
suspension bill and deny us the opportunity once again to debate it.
  I would just like to say Ray Kelly is the Commissioner of Customs; he 
opposes it. The union opposes it, the Secretary of Treasury opposes it, 
the administration opposed it, and almost half of the members of the 
Committee on Ways and Means opposed it, but we will not get an 
opportunity to vote on that issue.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, 
and in response to some of the concerns registered, and I can certainly 
sympathize with our distinguished colleague, but I do think that we 
have put together here a good bill, and it is one

[[Page 10802]]

that in committee the total package enjoyed the support of both sides 
of the aisle overwhelmingly. But we are, I think, making some common 
sense changes, and at the same time we are maintaining and even 
increasing some benefits as Customs inspectors or to Customs inspectors 
in recognition of their hard work and the valuable services they 
perform. These revisions are identical to those that this committee and 
the full House passed overwhelmingly last year.
  The night pay reform still keeps Customs officers in a better 
position than other federal employees, and the bill does not change 
some of the other special benefits that Customs officers receive. For 
example, Customs officers receive twice the hourly rate for overtime 
while FEPA employees receive only one and a half times the hourly rate. 
The night pay reform is not meant to penalize our hard-working Customs 
officers. Instead, it is designed to advance common sense.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Weller), our colleague who serves on the Committee on 
Ways and Means.
  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this important 
legislation today, and first, let me begin by commending my friend and 
colleague from Illinois (Mr. Crane), chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Trade, putting forward a good bill, a bill which was endorsed by 
unanimous bipartisan vote, the Committee on Ways and Means just this 
past week. I rise in support of this legislation, the Trade Agency 
Authorizations, Drug-free Borders, Prevention of On-line Pornography 
Act of 1999. It is important legislation designed to protect children 
from drugs and child pornographers. Amongst the most important 
provisions of H.R. 1833, the bill authorizes $10 million for the Child 
Cyber Smuggling Center to provide the U.S. Customs Service with the 
necessary tools to prevent child pornography and child sexual 
exploitation initiated over the Internet. I also want to commend my 
friend and colleague, the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) 
for her leadership on this issue as she authored the original 
legislation that was included in this bill today.
  Protecting children from Internet predators is an issue that is 
important to the folks back home in the south suburbs of Chicago. This 
last year I received a phone call from a mother asking for help in 
responding to a situation affecting her 9-year-old daughter. An 
Internet predator posted her child's name on several pornographic 
Internet sites and in chat rooms and advertised for certain favors. To 
protect their daughter, their family was forced to move from their home 
and to hide from those they feared would contact them as a result of 
this Internet advertising. When they sought the help of local police, 
they were told there is no law preventing predators from doing this to 
young children. I am proud that legislation I authored, which became 
law last year, the Protecting Children From Internet Predators Act 
which made it illegal to use the Internet to target an individual under 
the age of 16 for sexually explicit messages or contacts, is now law, 
and I want to thank this House for the bipartisan support.
  Let me explain very clearly with some startling facts and statistics 
why this legislation is so important and deserves bipartisan support, 
because we should all care about kids, and we should all care about 
child pornography and its impact on children. It is estimated that by 
the year 2002 more than 45 million children will be on-line with access 
to the Internet. The number of child pornography and pedophilia sites 
is impossible to determine, but the Center for Missing Children 
estimates that are 10,000 web sites maintained by pedophiles while the 
CyberAngles organization estimates 17,000 pedophile web sites available 
via the Internet. The United States alone law enforcement has 
confiscated more than 500,000 indecent images, photos of children, some 
as young as 2 years of age, and since January 1 of 1998 federal law 
enforcement has arrested over 460 adults for Internet-related child 
sexual exploitation offenses.
  Mr. Speaker, we need to do more to protect kids from child 
pornography, to protect children from being exploited by those who 
would prey on them via the Internet. This legislation gives the United 
States Customs Service the tools they need. It deserves bipartisan 
support. Let us protect the kids from pornographers.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Levin).
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the objective of H.R. 1833 
to provide the U.S. Customs Service with the resource it needs to 
safeguard our borders and to put a stop to the spread of child 
pornography on-line. The men and women of the U.S. Customs Service 
perform vital functions with respect both to law enforcement and 
preserving the integrity of U.S. trade with foreign nations there on 
the front line.
  Much of this bill is devoted to authorizing the appropriation of 
funds for the acquisition of sophisticated narcotics detection 
equipment by the Customs Service. Ironically, however, Section 123 (b) 
would cut the pay of some of the very people who will be operating that 
equipment. The current pay structure for Customs inspectors and 
officers was put into place in 1993. It was designed to reflect the 
unusual demands of inspectors' and officers' jobs, the odd hours, the 
unpredictability of schedules, the physical safety risk. Under this 
system, if a majority of the hours in an inspector officer's shift 
falls within the window from 3 p.m. to 8 a.m., the inspector officer is 
paid at a premium rate for the shift. 1833 would change it. Let me just 
give my colleagues an example.
  For example, take the Customs inspector who regularly works the 3 
a.m. to 11 a.m. shift. Assuming that that inspector earns $19.25 per 
hour as base pay, his or her premium pay under the current system is 
$154 per week. Under H.R. 1833, the premium pay would be reduced by 
$96.25 per week, and assuming that shift would work throughout the 
year, it would amount to a reduction in pay of $5,000 a year.
  Why this provision? It was introduced without adequate consideration 
of the adverse impact it would have on actual Customs inspectors and 
officers. The sponsors of this provision relied on a report by the 
Inspector General that did nothing more than calculate the absolute 
increase in night pay differential over a 3-year period since enactment 
of the current arrangement.

                              {time}  1115

  The report did not study the cause of that increase, nor did it 
purport to find that that increase was unjustified. It was simply an 
accounting of the size of the increase.
  So what happens? The majority decides to bring this bill under 
suspension, with no ability for us to present an amendment. This is a 
distortion of the suspension process. The chair of the subcommittee and 
others have said this passed unanimously. True, after an amendment was 
introduced to strike it, it was debated. We lost it on a straight party 
vote, but we had a chance to raise it.
  What the majority is doing here is putting forth a bill that is good 
in almost all of its provisions and tying in a provision that is not 
justified and, I think, is not justifiable. They essentially trapped 
the minority, saying if you want to vote against a bill that is 
generally good because of one provision and it is a serious one, go 
ahead and do it.
  Mr. Speaker, bipartisanship should have some meaning in this place. 
There is no excuse whatsoever for this procedure. It was tried last 
session, the same trick was tried, and what happened? The bill died in 
the Senate because of provisions that are not related to the important 
work of the Customs force and had nothing to do with child pornography, 
which we obviously must be very concerned about.
  This is not a tax bill. There is no reason to have this bill brought 
on suspension or in any other way that prevents an amendment.
  Mr. Speaker, we talk about common sense. Common sense and common 
decency in a legislative body mean giving people a chance to present an 
amendment and debating it. This is not a defensible procedure.

[[Page 10803]]

  I suggest that we vote ``aye,'' because the bill, in all but one of 
its major provisions, is a strong bill that we should pass. But I just 
want the majority here to understand that we resent this procedure. 
There is no reason for it. It undermines the bipartisanship that the 
majority sometimes says it believes in. We will do what happened last 
time. We will march over to the Senate and ask it to extricate this 
House from an unfair procedure.
  My colleagues may think they are being politically clever, but they 
are going to pay for it in terms of feelings between the majority and 
the minority.
  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Last year in committee we considered identical provisions on 
reforming pay, and my colleagues across the aisle did not move to 
strike. I find it difficult now for them to say that we are being 
unfair today.
  The irony of the current system is that one can receive night pay for 
the entire noon-to-8-p.m. shift, but one would receive no night pay for 
working a 4-a.m.-to-noon shift, even for those brutal hours between 4 
a.m. and 6 a.m., and that makes no sense. This bill would fix this 
problem.
  Our goal is not to penalize Customs officers, but to correct an 
anomaly in the law.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I do not think there is any controversy about the facts between the 
majority and the minority. It was opposed last year by the Democrats; 
it was opposed by the Commission of Customs, it was opposed by the 
union, it was opposed by the employees, and it is still being opposed, 
and it has no place in this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. 
Cardin).
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Rangel) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, there is much good in this bill. As the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Levin) has pointed out, there are a lot of provisions in 
here that are extremely important to the Customs Service. H.R. 1833 
provides additional resources needed for the U.S. Customs Service to 
combat illegal drug activities across our border; it will provide 
additional equipment with the latest technology for the antidrug 
enforcement provisions. It provides additional funds for the Child 
Cyber-Smuggling Center to assist in our efforts to prevent child 
pornography.
  So there is a lot of good in this bill. We are going to support it. I 
think it is going to get a large vote.
  But there is bad in this bill. There are provisions that should not 
be in here. It amends existing laws concerning the payment of night-
shift pay for our Customs officers.
  Let me talk a little bit about what this Congress did before, why we 
put shift pay differential in the law. Congress found that these odd 
hour shifts that Customs officials are assigned, they do not volunteer, 
are assigned as part of their work, have an adverse impact on the 
quality of life of Customs officials who are required to work regularly 
scheduled shifts at night, on Sundays or holidays. We found, as a body, 
that the shift differential compensation levels are substantially 
greater than applied generally to other Federal employees for such 
regularly scheduled work. So what this legislation is doing is altering 
the balance that we took in 1993, and that is just wrong.
  U.S. Customs Service performs vital functions of both law enforcement 
and preserving the integrity of U.S. trade laws with foreign nations. 
The current compensation structure was designed to take account of the 
unusual stresses of their job, both on-job safety risks and irregular 
work hours. We should honor that, and I agree with the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Levin), the process should provide us an opportunity as a 
body to express our will on the subject. But the process that has been 
used by the majority will deny that opportunity today.
  Yes, we will support the bill because of the important provisions in 
it, but the provision concerning pay differential is wrong; it should 
be removed from the bill.
  This bill alters the balanced approached crafted in 1993 in two ways. 
First, the provision restricts the hours that qualify for the night 
shift differential to hours between 6 p.m. and 6 a.m. Second, the 
provision compensates Customs officers at the differential rate only 
for those hours that occur between 6 p.m. and 6 a.m. (with one limited 
exception), and not the entire shirt. Effectively, these changes will 
mean that a Customs officer who works a shift starting at 3 a.m. and 
ending at 11 a.m. will receive the shift differential for only 3 hours 
of that shift.
  To offset some of the loss in pay likely to occur, section 121 of the 
bill adjusts the overtime cap that, under current law, restricts the 
amount of overtime pay a Customs officer may earn in one year. In 
effect, this adjustment would allow Customs officers to work more 
overtime to compensate for lost wages, or put another way, Customs 
officers will have to work more to get the same pay. Such a result 
seems unfair, given that no one (including Customs) has alleged that 
Customs officers are overcompensated. Moreover, only a small percentage 
of officers currently reach the overtime cap, and therefore would even 
benefit from the new provision.
  A single report, done in 1996 by the Office of Inspector General 
(OIG), has been offered to support this change to night shift 
differential pay. That report purportedly reviews the operation of the 
night pay differential and the overtime cap since COPRA. The report, 
which concludes that the COPRA resulted in an increase in overall 
premium night shift differential payments, is, however, seriously 
flawed.
  First, the OIG report merely calculated the absolute increase in 
night differential pay over a three year period. The report did not 
investigate the cause of the increase. The OIG's report did not 
investigate whether the increase was due to an overall increase in the 
number of hours being worked, whether there was an increase in the 
number of late shifts being worked due to increased trade, or whether 
the increase in cost was attributable to an increase in base wages. 
Rather, the OIG report merely concludes that the increase was due to 
COPRA without investigating, entertaining or otherwise considering any 
other possible reasons for the increase.
  Second, the OIG report did not assess the impact on Customs 
employees' salaries. As discussed above, the 1993 changes to the 
methods of calculating premium night shift differential payments was 
part of a comprehensive package of reforms intended to ensure that 
Customs officers would receive pay adequate compensation for the hard 
and, often dangerous, work they perform. Altering the carefully crafted 
package Congress created in 1993 without assessing the impact on 
Customs officers' overall pay is irresponsible, and could result in an 
unwarranted pay cut for many of these officers. Such a result seems 
unfair, given that no one, including OIG and Customs, has alleged that 
Customs employees are overpaid. Third, OIG did not find any evidence of 
abuse in this system. In fact, to the contrary, the OIG report 
specifically states that Customs management did not change work 
schedules to allow employees to earn more shift differential pay. 
Rather, Customs management continued to schedule shifts to fit 
customer's demand.
  We are not opposed to considering amendments to Customs officers pay, 
if a credible study evaluates and recommends that legislative changes 
be made. However, we are opposed to cutting someone's wages based on 
report that shows nothing. The men and women of the U.S. Customs 
Service perform vital functions with respect to both law enforcement--
keeping drugs and other contraband from crossing our borders--and 
preserving the integrity of U.S. trade with foreign nations. Their 
current compensation structure was designed to take account of the 
unusual stresses of their job--both the on-the-job safety risks and the 
irregular hours. We do not believe that there is clear evidence that 
those aspects of a Customs officer's job have changed in a way that 
would justify reducing their pay, which is precisely what H.R. 1833 
will do.
  It's too bad, Mr. Speaker. We have a good bill here. We found a flaw 
and I believe there would have been a way to address this issue that 
would have made both sides of this Congress happy and would have been 
supported by the men and women who will actually be affected by our 
vote today. I am sorry we missed an opportunity.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Becerra).
  Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Rangel) for yielding me this time.

[[Page 10804]]

  There is good news, obviously, and some bad news in regard to H.R. 
1833. The good news, as we have heard, is that this bill contains 
authorizations for funds which are desperately needed for drug 
interdiction, to combat child pornography, and to help the Customs 
Department automate its very antiquated computer system.
  By the way, with regard to that computer system, which is about 15 
years old, it has browned out on several occasions. That means it has 
come close to actually blacking out completely. The 6-hour lapse of 
that brown-out caused the Customs caseload to increase not 6 hours, but 
by 2 weeks. Businesses across the country were thrown off their 
schedule for months.
  We are desperately in need of updating our computer system at the 
Customs Department because of the constantly growing load of import and 
export product coming into this country and leaving this country.
  Mr. Speaker, there is also bad news with H.R. 1833, and that is that 
it contains a provision that has nothing to do with Customs running its 
shop well, nothing to do with treating its employees well; and has no 
place in this bill, and should not come up through this suspension 
process for a vote. Unfortunately, this is a heavy-handed approach to 
try to get something done that was not approved by either the employees 
of the Customs Department or the Customs Department itself.
  Management and labor do not agree with this provision, yet it is in 
here. That is a heavy-handed approach to try to impose upon both the 
agency and its employees something that they do not believe in. It is 
unfortunate that we have to micromanage at this stage a bill that, for 
the most part, does great good for the Customs Department.
  That agency is in need of our support. Its workload is growing 
constantly with regard to trying to interdict drugs. We know the issue 
of child pornography and trying to stop it from coming into this 
country. Why we would clutter a good bill with a bad provision makes no 
sense. But because of the procedural mess we find ourselves in, 
unfortunately, we have very little choice. Do we oppose a bill that for 
the most part is very good, to make a point, or do we vote for a bill, 
understanding that we are providing for legislation the possibility of 
enacting a law that would change the rules of the game for employees 
who have no say as to their work hours?
  It is unfortunate that we are there; it is unfortunate that employees 
at Customs find themselves in this situation, not because management at 
Customs wants to do this, but because Congress, in its wisdom to 
micromanage, has decided to include a provision which they do not want.
  If we extract this, this bill would fly without any no votes, I would 
suspect. But with this, unfortunately, there are a number of people who 
have to pause. Pause because while we want to do good, we do not want 
to do bad at the same time. Unfortunately for Customs employees, it 
looks like they are going to have to swallow some bad to politically 
take the good. That is unfortunate, and it should never happen.
  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Blunt).
  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I know this bill is to reauthorize the 
Customs Service, and I know the Customs Service has a difficult job. 
One of the jobs I wanted to just mention to my colleagues as we are 
debating this bill involves a company in my State that imports lots of 
items that are under the classification of festive items, Christmas 
items. Those items have a different tariff duty than other items do, 
and just so the House is aware, recently one of their items, an item 
that was an inexpensive music box that played Silent Night, the Customs 
folks would not classify that a ``festive item'' because, they said, it 
was a music box and because, they said, it played Silent Night instead 
of Jingle Bells, I am not sure which. But the code is specific. It 
tries to set aside that type of item.
  Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if we could not ask the Customs Service 
to be more reasonable in applying those laws. This is not an expensive 
thing; it is not a musical instrument. It is a one-time-a-year use that 
happens to play a religious Christmas-type of song.
  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to 
reassure my colleague that we will look into it. This is the first I 
have heard of it, and it does sound a little bizarre, and I hope it is 
just a parochial, isolated case and not universal.
  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CRANE. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri.
  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman being willing to 
look into it, and I appreciate the time of the Members here today.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  While the distinguished subcommittee chairman is looking into the 
controversy of Jingle Bells and Silent Night, I hope he might take some 
time to read the letter from the Commissioner of Customs, Raymond 
Kelly, who indicated on May 25 that he is opposed to this subtitle C, 
sections 122, 123 and 124 of the bill that is before us today, and a 
bill that apparently we are unable to do anything about.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield to the subcommittee chairman and 
ask him whether or not he would consider reconsidering this provision 
since it is a good bill and a lot of people worked hard on this bill. 
It helps prevent drugs, it helps prevent the spread of child 
pornography, it supports the administration for things that they have 
been waiting for, and we want to be able to go over to the Senate and 
say it is a good bill and that this provision should be reconsidered.
  I hope the majority might consider excluding this provision or 
reconsidering this provision in conference, because it is a good piece 
of legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I know how difficult it is for the majority to rule with 
just six votes in the majority, but I think that is the reason why now 
more than ever we should try to work together on those things that we 
agree on, because that is what the American people want.

                              {time}  1130

  They do not want to see us coming down here each and every day 
fighting each other over things that deal with procedure while they are 
working for substantive issues to be passed.
  There is no need for us to have had to discuss this provision today, 
Mr. Speaker, because it had no place in this bill. If certain 
Republicans wanted it that badly, they should have brought it to the 
floor and had debate on it. It is just wrong to fold this into the 
suspension calendar, which says that it is not a controversial 
position.
  We can hear what we want from the other side, we can examine the 
Record, but no one challenges that the employees did not want this, the 
union did not want this, the Commissioner of Customs did not want this, 
the President of the United States and his administration did not want 
this.
  There is not one scintilla of evidence that substantiates the need 
for changing this except somebody on the other side of the aisle, 
somebody whose name is not in the record, wanted this change, and 
waited until the middle of the night on the suspension calendar to fold 
it into basically a good bill. It is wrong to do this, and I hope it 
does not happen again.
  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the Department of the Treasury Inspector General issued 
a very rigorous recommendation to end the night pay anomaly back in 
1996. The Inspector General went further and asked for a 10 percent pay 
differential. Our bill does not go so far and preserves a 15 to 20 
percent differential, better than any other Federal employee, in 
recognition of the hard work by our Customs employees.
  Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the recommendation of the 
Inspector General, since my colleague on the other side of the aisle 
thinks this came from us.
  He said, ``The Assistant Secretary (Enforcement) should direct 
Customs to seek legislation that would lessen the number of hours 
available for Customs officers to earn night differential

[[Page 10805]]

and reduce the night work differentials to a 10 percent premium on base 
pay.'' As I said, that is in contrast to our 15 to 20 percent.
  ``The change to the COPRA should create a night differential payment 
package that would more accurately reimburse Customs officers for hours 
actually worked at night, as was done previously under the FEPA. We 
believe guidance similar to the FEPA would accomplish this purpose.''
  So this is not new. That was 1996 when that recommendation was made.
  Mr. Speaker, I just want to quickly recite some other facts of the 
Customs bill that deals with trying to curb the abuses by pedophiles on 
the Internet.
  In the United States alone, law enforcement has confiscated more than 
500,000 indecent images of children, some as young as 2 years old. 
Since January 1 of last year, Federal law enforcement has arrested over 
460 adults for Internet-related child sexual exploitation offenses, and 
according to some police estimates, as many as 80,000 child pornography 
files are traded online every week.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson), our distinguished colleague who is 
responsible for that precious component of this legislation.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of 
this legislation and its many provisions to improve the effectiveness 
of the Customs Office, but I will focus my comments on the provisions 
of this bill that strengthen Custom's ability to combat cyber 
predators.
  The Internet has revolutionized the way we learn, communicate, and 
even shop. It is making a reality of equal opportunity by providing 
truly equal access to information and the power that knowledge confers. 
But there is a dark side to the Internet that we must confront. Parents 
need to know that just as there are dangerous areas in every city, 
there are dangerous sites on the Internet. We need to do a better job 
of protecting our children from entering a website or chatroom that 
could lead them to harm.
  The old question of ``Do you know where your child is'' has a whole 
new meaning in the age of cyperspace. Most people are not aware that 
the Internet is now the number one choice, the number one choice, of 
predators as a means of preying on children and trafficking in child 
pornography.
  There are an estimated 10,000 websites maintained by pedophiles. 
Trading in images of child pornography on the Internet takes place 24 
hours a day, 7 days a week. Let us make no mistake about it, these 
people are out there lurking in cyberspace, and any child on the 
Internet could fall prey to these pedophiles.
  Roughly 12 million children use the Internet every day, spending an 
average of 8 hours a week in chatrooms where they can come into contact 
with online pedophiles. The danger of these chatrooms is that they 
provide sex predators with a forum to prey on unsuspecting kids who 
cannot see who is behind the screen on the other end of the line.
  When I go into fifth grade classrooms, I ask those kids, what does 
your mom tell you about talking to strangers? And they all know the 
answer. What do your folks tell you about getting into the cars of 
strangers? And their little faces just light up, because they know they 
should not do that and they will not do that, and that I can count on 
them, that they will not do that.
  It is a new world. We have to understand the new rules, and just as 
our kids will not talk to a stranger or get in the car of a stranger, 
we have to teach them not to go into the chatrooms, where everyone is a 
stranger.
  These cyber predators use their anonymity to lure our children out of 
their homes to meet people solely for the purpose of sexual assault. 
Sexual predators used to lurk around the schoolyard. Now they lurk in 
our living rooms, they lurk in our children's bedrooms, they lurk 
wherever we have our computer terminal.
  Listen to the Hartford Current of February 18, 1999: ``A 31-year-old 
Enfield man was arrested Wednesday on charges that he sexually 
assaulted a 12-year-old East Hartford girl he met on America Online 
chatroom.
  She told the police, and I am skipping forward, she told them that 
she had met Ed in the chatroom on America Online, and that they had 
graphic sexual discussions over the Internet. She identified herself to 
him as Veronica, which was not her real name. They would talk for hours 
at night while the girl's mother was at work and she was babysitting 
for her younger sister.
  On February 4, they arranged to meet in the parking lot of the East 
Hartford apartment complex so her mother would not know.
  Kids think this is a game, like so many other games they play on 
television. This did not turn out to be a game for this kid. This 
turned out to be a terrible experience.
  These cyber predators use their anonymity to lure our children out of 
our homes for the sole purpose of sexual assault. This legislation will 
help the Customs Service expand their work in combatting cyber 
predators and purveyors of child pornography.
  They have done a phenomenal job. They have gotten a conviction of 
every single arrest. But they need better funding, they need more 
people, and they need more authority. This Congress is working on all 
three of those fronts.
  This bill authorizes better funding of the child pornography and 
child sexual exploitation program that is designed to capture online 
pedophiles, and it would also better fund the operation of the child 
pornography cyber tip line run by the National Center for Missing and 
Exploited Children that helps identify and locate online predators.
  As more kids go online every day, we need to ensure their safety. It 
is time to let online pedophiles know that they can no longer hide 
behind our computer screens. I urge support of this legislation, and 
full funding of the needed $10 million in the appropriations process.
  I thank the chairman of the subcommittee for his long work on this 
and for his leadership.
  Mr. LAMPSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 1\1/2\ 
minutes in support of this bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sununu). Is there objection to each side 
being granted an additional 1 minute for debate?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lampson) is 
recognized to control 1 minute.
  Mr. LAMPSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise for 2 reasons: First, to applaud the 
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) for her efforts to help the 
U.S. Customs Service battle against child exploitation on the Internet, 
and second, to support the provisions of her legislation included in 
H.R. 1838.
  Child pornography was a worldwide industry that was all but 
eradicated in the 1980s, but the explosive growth of computer 
technology via e-mail, chatrooms, and news groups have created a bigger 
demand for pornographic pictures of our children on the information 
superhighway.
  Congress must step up to the plate and take some action to stem the 
growing tide of child exploitation on the Internet. In February, I 
introduced a bill to authorize $5 million to appropriate each year for 
the next 4 fiscal years to fund the Cyber Smuggling Center.
  Until that bill reaches the floor, I would ask Members' complete 
support for H.R. 1838, which contains provisions championed by the 
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson), including the addition of 
$100,000 for the Cyber Smuggling Center for fiscal year 2000.
  I urge all of the Members, on this National Missing Children's Day, 
to support the Customs Service's fight against child pornography on the 
Internet by voting in favor of H.R. 1833.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane) is 
recognized for 1 minute in closing.
  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield my final 1 minute to my distinguished 
colleague, the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle).
  Mr. NUSSLE. I thank the chairman for yielding time to me, Mr. 
Speaker.

[[Page 10806]]

  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this commonsense legislation. It is 
about time that we have the opportunity here today on this floor to 
move legislation that will, as my colleague, the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) said, begin the process of patrolling what 
is happening with pornography, of being able to work on drugs coming 
into this country, being able to do what every one of our constituents 
back in our districts at town meetings across this country have told 
us, that we need to do a better job at our borders.
  We finally have the opportunity to pass this commonsense reform 
today. Yet, for some strange reason there seems to be some lingering 
technicality out there with regard to this legislation which is making 
it very difficult for all of the very positive reasons for maybe some 
of the Democrats to not support this legislation.
  I would implore those who are listening in their offices and getting 
ready to come over to consider voting for this that it is time that 
they put their word and deeds where the actions of our constituents 
have requested us to, and that is to pass this commonsense reform for 
our Customs Service.
  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend my 
colleague from Illinois, Representative Crane, for his hard work in 
bringing this important legislation forward early on in this Congress. 
H.R. 1833 will provide the U.S. Customs Service with additional tools 
to prevent illegal drugs from entering our nation. This is a vital bill 
that will go a long way in winning the war on drugs but the most 
valuable asset of any agency is its workforce.
  Unfortunately, H.R. 1833 also contains a provision which I believe 
will seriously harm the morale of our Customs agents and impede our 
ability to recruit qualified individuals. H.R. 1833 contains a 
provision that restricts the hours during which customs agents can earn 
night shift differential pay to between the hours of 6 p.m. and 6 a.m. 
Currently, Customs agents earn night shift differential pay between the 
hours of 3 p.m. and 8 a.m. The Customs Agency is the only federal 
agency where employees work a constantly changing shift. For example, 
employees work days for two weeks, then evenings, then nights. Night 
shift differential pay is a standard law enforcement benefit and one of 
the few federal law enforcement benefits extended to Customs agents.
  If this bill passes the House, we will reduce the amount of pay at 
Customs agent earns by an average of $96.00 a week or $5000.00 a year. 
A Customs agent making $40,000 a year will face a reduction in pay of 
nearly 12%. Do we really want to tell Customs agents that we are only 
willing to spend more money on desperately needed equipment to fight 
the war on drugs if they give up a portion of their yearly salary? I 
think not, this provision sends entirely the wrong message to these 
brave men and women.
  Moreover, I have serious concerns that this provision says to Customs 
agents that they can make up for the lost night shift differential pay 
due to enhancements in overtime benefits. But in order to earn back 
lost pay, an individual would be required to work more than forty hours 
a week. This is simply wrong. We would be telling these federal workers 
that they must spend greater and greater amounts of time away from 
their family just to meet their current needs. Again, this is backwards 
and contrary to the family values we should be promoting. This 
provision sends the wrong message to the indvidiuals who play a 
significant role in protecting our border and our entire nation from 
shipments of illegal drugs.
  During the week of May 10th, a Customs Agent was shot on his way home 
from work by an individual who had targeted him as a law enforcement 
official. The Federal Government does not extend most law enforcement 
officer benefits to Customs Agents. This bill would limit one of the 
few law enforcement benefits that Customs Agents receive.
  I am greatly disappointed that H.R. 1833 is on the Suspension 
Calendar today, and that we do not have the opportunity to even offer 
an amendment that would have removed section 123(b), the new night 
shift differential pay provisions. I think that Members of this House 
deserve the opportunity to support this important bill while also 
supporting our U.S. Customs Agents.
  Mr. Speaker, again, I would like to thank my colleague, 
Representative Crane for all of his work in bringing H.R. 1833 forward 
and express my profound disappointment in the currently included night 
shift differential pay provisions. I believe we need to strengthen the 
Customs Agency if we are going to stop illegal drugs from entering our 
Country and we must do all that we can to protect our children. 
However, we must not say to Customs Agents that their tireless efforts 
are insufficient, and that equipment counts more than the personnel. I 
firmly hope that we can work our differences out when this bill goes to 
Conference with the Senate.
  Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, here we go again. We all oppose child 
pornography. We all want to fight drugs. But why include provisions to 
cut our Customs officers' pay in this important bill?
  This does not make sense! How can you ask Customs employees--who 
enforce more laws than any other federal officers--to be more effective 
when you open the door to cutting some of their pay up to $96 a week? 
Giving employees $5,000 less pay in a year is an incentive to help them 
do their jobs better?
  The bill undermines the partnership that has flourished between 
Customs personnel and their managers in the successful drug 
interdiction efforts. How does cutting Customs employees pay for 
working their regular night shifts help bolster our War on Drugs?
  I support the provisions of H.R. 1833 that would increase the number 
of Customs Service employees along the border and provide Customs with 
state-of-the-art drug detection equipment. I support the $10 million to 
prevent the imports of on-line child pornography. But I reject the 
provisions that cut Customs hazardous pay for essential nighttime 
shifts.
  H.R. 1833 gives us tools to fight the War on Drugs, but puts those 
who will use the tools in straitjackets. We will lose the War on Drugs 
and waste taxpayers' money if we spend money on expensive, cutting-edge 
equipment at the same time we undermine employee morale and labor 
standards.
  I support the frontline soldiers in the War on Drugs--our Customs 
personnel--and urge support for legislation that enhances, rather than 
detracts, from their good work.
  Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to rise 
in support of H.R. 1833. This bill reauthorizes the U.S. Trade 
Representative and Custom offices as well as increase efforts to patrol 
our borders and protect the Internet from online predators.
  H.R. 1833 affects agricultural trade with its authorization of the 
United States Trade Representative. I support this bill and I believe 
this bill is an opportunity to urge the Ways and Means Committee to 
work with me to reform our sugar subsidy problem. I have introduced 
with Congressman George Miller (D-CA) H.R. 1850, the Sugar Program 
Reform Act. The Miller-Miller bill would phase out the sugar program by 
the end of 2002.
  The sugar program is the ``sugar daddy'' of corporate welfare. Why? 
Because most of the benefits of this program go to huge corporate sugar 
producers, not the typical family farmer.
  The sugar program's sole purpose is to prop up the price of sugar in 
the United States through a complex system of low-interest, nonrecourse 
loans and tight import restrictions. In fact, the price of sugar in the 
United States today is roughly four times as high as the price of sugar 
world wide.
  As a result, the sugar program imposes a ``sugar tax'' on consumers, 
forcing them to more than $1 billion in higher prices for food and 
sugar every year.
  It devastates the environment, particularly the fragile Everglades in 
my home State of Florida. Higher prices for sugar have encouraged more 
and more sugar production in the Everglades Agricultural Area, leading 
to high levels of phosphorus-laden agricultural runoff flowing into the 
Everglades, which has damaged the ecosystem.
  It has cost many Americans their jobs because it has restricted the 
supply of sugar that is available on the American market, resulting in 
the closure of a dozen sugar refineries across the country.
  Finally, it hampers our ability to expand trade opportunities for 
America's farmers. It is hypocritical for the United States to protect 
domestic sugar production while urging other countries to open their 
agricultural markets. America loses leverage in trade negotiations as a 
result.
  I am not here to talk about my bill, but to raise the issues of trade 
in H.R. 1833. This bill reauthorizes funding for the United States 
Trade Representative. The USTR is charged with helping to enforce trade 
laws and to break down barriers around the world. As a matter of fact, 
there will be important trade talks in Seattle later this year to 
discuss eliminating trade barriers. However, the USTR will head into 
Seattle with little credibility as long as the U.S. sugar program is in 
existence.
  At Seattle, our USTR will try to have foreign nations lower their 
subsidies claiming that subsidies are unfair to consumers, taxpayers 
and trading nations. At the same time, the U.S. will greatly impair the 
ability of foreign sugar to come into this huge market because of our 
crazy sugar policy. This double standard will

[[Page 10807]]

greatly affect our ability to argue the benefits of no trade barriers. 
All countries will try to protect their favorite subsidy or tariff as 
long as the United States maintains its indefensible defense of the 
sugar barons. I am hopeful that passage of this legislation will give 
the USTR the resources necessary to break down foreign barriers while 
educating all policy makers on the importance of lowering our own 
barriers on sugar.
  The sugar program is an archaic, unnecessary government handout to 
corporate sugar producers at the expense of consumers, workers, and the 
environment. It is truly deserving of reform. I hope the USTR will work 
to eliminate the double standard of the sugar program.
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1833.
  While this bill contains many worthy provisions, there are a number 
of provisions contained in H.R. 1833 of particular importance to my 
constituents in South Florida. For example, the bill directs the 
following additional resources to Florida and Gulf Coast ports: $4.5 
million for 6 vehicle and container inspection systems; $11.8 million 
for 5 mobile truck x-rays; $7.2 million for 8 1-MeV pallet x-rays; 
$0.25 million for portable contraband detectors; and $0.3 million for 
25 contraband detection kits.
  The bill also authorizes a net increase of 40 inspectors at 
southeastern Florida seaports (Port of Miami, Port Everglades, and Port 
of Palm Beach) to process and screen cargo.
  In sum, this bill renews Congress' commitment to interdict drugs in 
Florida. For too long, Customs resources have been diverted to the 
southwestern border and Puerto Rico while drugs have poured into 
Florida. This bill begins to rectify that situation.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1833 is an excellent bill, and I urge my colleagues 
to support it.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 1833, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________