[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 10]
[House]
[Pages 13512-13538]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED 
                   AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2002

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 192 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 2500.

                              {time}  1833


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 2500) making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, 
Justice and State, the Judiciary, and related agencies for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes, with Mr. 
Hastings of Washington in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having 
been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf).
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the chairman of the full Committee 
on Appropriations.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I want to announce to Members 
that as we begin consideration of this very important appropriations 
bill that because of the heavy schedule for the floor this week, we 
would like to accomplish an agreement on limiting time on amendments, 
as we have done on other bills. In order to be fair to the membership, 
in order to do this, I would like to urge Members who have an amendment 
that they would like to have considered to this bill, that they present 
that as soon as they possibly can so that as we begin to create the 
universe of amendments that we will be considering, so that we will not 
leave anybody out.
  The schedule for the balance of the evening will be announced at a 
later

[[Page 13513]]

time by the majority leader, but at this point we are prepared to go 
into the general debate on the bill.
  I want to say a word of congratulations to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Chairman Wolf) for the tremendous leadership that he has 
shown in this, his first year as chairman of this particular 
subcommittee, and also to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), 
who is the ranking member. There has been a very cooperative effort 
between the gentleman and the chairman. They both have done a good job. 
Their staffs have worked diligently to present a good, fair bill.
  Will it satisfy everybody? I know there are a lot of folks that would 
like to see more money appropriated by this bill; others think it 
appropriates too much. So it is probably just at about the right place.
  So, again, I want to compliment the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman 
Wolf), who has done an outstanding job in providing the leadership for 
the subcommittee, and his partner in this effort, the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Serrano), who also has been a very constructive member of 
the subcommittee in getting us to this point.
  I am hopeful that we can expedite this bill. We have four other 
appropriations bills, plus the conference report on the supplemental, 
awaiting consideration by the House, so the sooner we can expedite this 
business, the sooner we can get on to the rest of the appropriations 
business.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to begin consideration of H.R. 2500, the 
Departments of Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary, and related 
agencies. The bill provides funding for programs whose impact ranges 
from the safety of people in their homes and communities, to the 
conduct of diplomacy around the world, to predicting the weather from 
satellites in outer space.
  The bill before the Committee and in the House today reflects the 
delicate balance of needs and requirements. We have drafted what I 
consider to be a responsible bill for fiscal year 2002 spending levels 
for the departments and agencies under the subcommittee's jurisdiction. 
We have had to carefully prioritize the funding in this bill and make 
hard judgments with regard to scarce resources.
  Overall, the bill before the committee recommends a total of $38.5 
billion in discretionary funding, of which $38.1 bill is general-
purpose discretionary, and $440 million is for the discretionary 
conservation function. The bill is $972 million above the enacted level 
for fiscal year 2001, and $600 million above the President's request.
  For the Department of Justice, the bill provides $21.5 billion in 
discretionary funding, $672 million above last year's level and $623 
million above the President's request. This includes a $455 million 
increase to address critical detention requirements to house criminals 
and illegal aliens.
  It also includes $5 million in support of the President's faith-based 
initiative at the Federal Bureau of Prisons, including a pilot program 
at Petersburg, Virginia, and Leavenworth, Kansas, Federal 
penitentiaries. I firmly believe that faith can have a positive impact 
on the lives of those incarcerated, and I know that we must provide 
prisoners with something more positive than just putting them in 
prison; and a faith-based initiative which will be open to all faiths I 
believe can make a big impact in reducing recidivism.
  There is a $469 million increase for the Drug Enforcement 
Administration, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the U.S. 
Attorneys to enhance Federal law enforcement's ability to fight the war 
on violent crime and drugs and to combat cybercrime and national 
security threats.
  We have also included report language that will ensure that the 
Inspector General at the Department of Justice will have the full 
authority, for the first time, to investigate allegations of employee 
misconduct within both the FBI and the DEA. Again, this will be the 
first time that the IG will have permission to look at the whole 
Department, including the FBI and DEA.
  This move is significant, given the problems that have plagued the 
FBI, and the DEA to a lesser extent. Having this added measure of 
oversight will be a good thing for the FBI and the DEA, and it will 
hopefully begin to restore the American people's faith in these two 
valiant and extremely important organizations. There are good men and 
women who are in both agencies who serve the country very well; and by 
giving the IG having the ability to look, I think will be a good thing.
  There is a $252 million increase for the Immigration and 
Naturalization Service to enforce our immigration laws, hire additional 
Border Patrol agents, and continue the interior enforcement effort. 
This funding level also includes the President's request for an 
additional $45 million to achieve a 6-month application processing 
standard. There is a $150 million increase to enforce Federal and State 
gun laws and distribute gun safety locks.
  This also empowers local communities to fight crime by providing $4.3 
billion for State and local law enforcement assistance. This includes 
funding for Violence against Women Act programs, victims of trafficking 
grants, the State Criminal Alien Assistance program, and local law 
enforcement block grant programs, COPS and juvenile justice programs.
  For the Department of Commerce, the bill provides $5.2 billion, $21 
million above the request. It provides full funding for the U.S. trade 
agencies, Census, and the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology, an increase of $29 million over the President's request for 
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, including the 
National Weather Service.
  The bill also includes $440 million on the conservation category as 
negotiated in the fiscal year 2001 Interior appropriations bill.
  The National Weather Service has been diligent in its pursuit of a 
new National Severe Storm Laboratory building in Norman, Oklahoma. The 
gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. Watts has been vigilant in his pursuit to 
provide the required capabilities of this laboratory. Beginning in 
1998, he has obtained funding to establish the National Severe Storms 
Laboratory.
  This year, through the efforts of the chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Treasury, Postal Service and General Government, the gentleman from 
Oklahoma (Mr. Istook), there is an agreement with the General Services 
Administration to actually construct this building. This committee has 
agreed to provide the above-standard GSA costs specific to the 
requirements for NOAA. This facility will allow NOAA to improve the 
detection of tornadoes nationwide. The bill also includes the full $440 
million, as I said, under the conservation category program as 
negotiated in the fiscal year 2001 Interior appropriations bill. So 
this I think will help the gentleman from Oklahoma Mr. (Watts) and the 
gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) and the University of Oklahoma to 
deal with that issue dealing with NOAA.
  For Judiciary, $63 million will begin the renovations at the U.S. 
Supreme Court, about half the amount needed to protect the life, safety 
and security of the millions of people who use that building. Also a 
cost-of-living increase to the attorneys who ensure the fairness of our 
criminal justice system by representing indigents in criminal cases.
  For the State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the 
bill provides $7.7 billion, $837 million above last year's 
appropriations, per the request of the Bush administration and per the 
request of Secretary Powell.
  It includes a programming increase of $419 million for diplomatic 
readiness and reform, including 360 new positions and major technology 
modernization, $1.3 billion, the full request, the full request, 
because of embassy security problems, for urgent embassy security 
needs, including the construction of new secure replacement embassies 
and consulates.
  Just last week, on July 12, the State Department released its first 
annual report on sexual trafficking in persons. The Congress ought to 
know that at

[[Page 13514]]

least 700,000 individuals a year, many women and children, are 
trafficked each year across international borders for sexual purposes. 
These victims are often subject to threats and violence and horrific 
living conditions. We must not tolerate this equivalent of modern-day 
slavery.
  The bill includes $3.8 million for important new initiatives to 
combat trafficking, including the cost of an office within the State 
Department to coordinate interagency anti-trafficking activities, and 
an international conference to develop systematic international 
solutions to the problem. Fifty thousand people are brought to this 
country alone every year for that purpose, and the subcommittee plans 
on holding a hearing, in-depth hearings on this, when we come back 
after the Labor Day break.
  The bill also includes $479 million for the Broadcasting Board of 
Governors, $9 million above the request, which includes funding for 
broadcasting initiatives in East Asia and the Middle East, and also 
making sure that the broadcasts get to the country of Sudan, where we 
know that they have slavery.
  For the miscellaneous and related agencies, the bill includes $2.1 
billion, $300 million above the current year level; $728 million for 
the Small Business Administration, an increase of $186 million above 
the President's request for important lending and assistance programs 
for the Nation's entrepreneurs; $232 million for the Maritime 
Administration, an increase of $128 million above the President's 
request, including funding for the Maritime Security Program, the title 
11 loan program and the important efforts to dispose of the backlog of 
obsolete merchant vessels, which we hope we can finally put to rest 
once and for all.
  $438 million, the requested amount for the Securities and Exchange 
Commission. I strongly support the SEC's recent effort to strengthen 
their enforcement of disclosure rules. Foreign corporations doing 
business in Sudan and other places playing a direct role in human 
rights abuses in Sudan have been able to offer securities to American 
investors; and as a result, these investors are unwittingly helping to 
subsidize these atrocities. American investors are helping to subsidize 
terrorism. American investors are helping to subsidize slavery.
  We appreciate what the SEC did, and we will continue to insist on the 
full exercise of existing authorities to inform and protect American 
investors in this area, and this message goes out to the new chairman 
of the SEC when he takes over. But I appreciate the acting chairman's 
efforts in this regard. 

                              {time}  1845

  Mr. Chairman, this bill provides funding of $3 million for the 
Commission on International Religious Freedom to monitor violations of 
religious freedom abroad and make policy recommendations to the State 
Department. I am particularly concerned about the denial of equal 
treatment to Coptic Christians by the government of Egypt. Funding for 
this Commission will help to ensure that such violations are given the 
attention they deserve by our foreign policymakers, whether being 
Egypt, whether being China, or wherever it may be.
  This is a very quick summary of the recommendations before the House 
today. The bill gives no ground on the ongoing war against crime and 
drugs and provides the resources to State and local law enforcement 
that has helped bring the violent crime rate down to its lowest level 
since the Justice Department began tracking it. It includes major 
increases for the State Department to allow the Secretary, Secretary 
Powell, to rejuvenate and reform the Department and to continue the 
important, ongoing efforts to improve embassy security. It represents 
our best take on matching the needs with scarce resources.
  I want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), the 
ranking member, who has been very effective and, I might say, these get 
to be sort of pro forma things, but, really, the gentleman is a good 
friend and someone we have worked very, very closely with. I want him 
to know that I appreciate his principal commitment, his thorough 
understanding of the programs in this bill, and I like sitting next to 
him with his great sense of humor, so I just wanted to thank him.
  I also would like to thank all of the members of the subcommittee for 
their help. The gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), who had been the 
chairman of this committee for 6 years, has helped me with regard to a 
number of issues. I would also like to thank the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Kolbe), the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Taylor), and the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham), 
the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), the gentleman from Louisiana 
(Mr. Vitter), the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan), the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard), the gentleman from 
Alabama (Mr. Cramer), and the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. 
Kennedy).
  Finally, I want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the 
full committee chairman, and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), 
the ranking member, for their help in moving this bill forward.
  I would also be remiss if I failed to mention how much I appreciate 
the professionalism and the cooperation of both the minority staff and 
the majority staff.
  I would like to thank the majority staff, Mike Ringler, who handles 
the budgets of the State Department and the United Nations; Leslie 
Albright, who ably works the Justice Department law enforcement 
programs, including the DEA, the U.S. Marshal Service and the FBI; 
Christine Ryan, a former FBI professional who oversees the Commerce 
Department budget and who is marrying a Marine Corps officer in a few 
short weeks when we finally finish this bill.
  I also want to thank Julie Miller, an extremely professional OMB 
official, who may even stay with the committee if we can get the 
approval, who has been detailed to the committee; and Carrie Hines, 
another top-notch professional who has been detailed to the committee.
  I appreciate the top-notch efforts of Gail Del Balzo, whose 
experience on the Senate Budget Committee, as assistant parliamentarian 
of the Senate and as general counsel of CBO, has prepared her well for 
the position of clerk of this subcommittee.
  These young professionals put in countless hours working weekends and 
late into the night. It is time spent away from their families and 
their friends, and yet they are dedicated to doing what is best for the 
American people, and we really appreciate them very much.
  On the minority side, I want to say exactly the same thing. In 
particular, I would like to thank Sally Chadbourne, Lucy Hand, Nadine 
Berg, Rob Nabors and Christine Maloy from the democratic staff who were 
willing to pitch in during all the long hours spent putting this bill 
together. It has been a unique experience. It has been more bipartisan 
than I have seen, quite frankly, for a long, long while.
  With that, I will just end by saying we tried hard to produce the 
best bill possible. It probably is not like the Ten Commandments. It is 
not perfect. I am sure there could be some changes here. While there 
cannot be any changes to the Ten Commandments, there can be in this 
bill, but we did not have that vision that the good Lord has, so we 
will be taking some amendments and doing some things, but I do hope 
Members will support the bill.

[[Page 13515]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY01.001



[[Page 13516]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY01.002



[[Page 13517]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY01.003



[[Page 13518]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY01.004



[[Page 13519]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY01.005



[[Page 13520]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY01.006



[[Page 13521]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY01.007



[[Page 13522]]

  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. 
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2500.
  I must begin by expressing my appreciation to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Wolf), the chairman of the subcommittee, and his great 
staff for the fair and bipartisan way they have handled this bill, with 
full consultation with our side. While we do not agree with every 
recommendation in the bill, we believe that, on balance, it is worthy 
of wide support on both sides of the aisle.
  I have sat in hearings and markups with the gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Wolf) for the last 3 years, but this is my first with him at the 
helm of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, and Judiciary. 
Having similarly landed at the top of the subcommittee with no prior 
service on it, I know how hard he has had to work to master the many 
and varied agencies and issues now under his jurisdiction, and I admire 
how well he has done.
  Staff on both sides of the aisle have made tremendous contributions 
to this process. They are Gail and Mike, Christine, Leslie, Julie and 
Carrie for the majority, as well as Jeff from the personal staff of the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf); on our side, Sally, Rob, Christine; 
and from my own staff, Lucy and Nadine. These are folks who are 
professionals, who do their job well and who make us look good all the 
time and, therefore, serve our country and its citizens very well.
  Mr. Speaker, the budget request was troubling, with deep cuts to 
important programs and questionable assumptions about congressional 
actions on fees and program changes. This bill is a great improvement 
on that budget request. Perhaps most important, the bill restores many 
of the unreasonable cuts proposed in the President's budget for State 
and local law enforcement and COPS. The budget request was almost $1 
billion below fiscal year 2001 levels for these programs, but the bill 
restores $661 million, including $150 million for COPS hiring. We are 
not all the way back, but we are moving in the right direction.
  The bill supports the Secretary of State's initiatives to invest in 
diplomatic readiness as well as the security, technology and 
infrastructure requirements of the State Department. The bill includes 
$7.4 billion for the State Department, an increase of $802 million, or 
12 percent above the current year. For core diplomatic activities under 
the Administration of Foreign Affairs account, the bill is 17 percent 
above fiscal year 2001. A significant investment is needed to ensure 
that the Secretary has adequate resources, both people and technology, 
to carry out our foreign policy and national security objectives and to 
ensure that our employees overseas work in the most secure environment.
  In contrast to bills in past years from this subcommittee, the bill 
fully funds the request for international peacekeeping. Peacekeeping, 
as we all know, can advance U.S. policy goals at a fraction of the cost 
of sending U.S. forces into trouble spots.
  While the funding provided for assessed contributions to the U.N. and 
other international organizations is close to the amount requested, 
there are no funds for rejoining UNESCO as proposed in the House-passed 
State Department authorization bill, which could create a problem down 
the line. The fence around $100 million of U.N. dues, pending 
certification that the U.N. is not exceeding its budget, has raised 
administration concern. But, unlike similar provisions in past House 
bills, it draws attention to the need for budget discipline but should 
not lead to any new arrears.



  Our side, Mr. Chairman, is quite pleased with the overall level of 
funding for NOAA whose activities in coastal and ocean conservation, 
the management and preservation of our Nation's fisheries, the weather 
forecasting activities, as well as the satellites and data systems that 
support them, plus critical research into global climate change and 
other oceanic and atmospheric phenomena are so important to our economy 
and environment as well as to the health and safety of our people. 
Within NOAA, Conservation Trust Fund activities are fully funded.
  We are also delighted to see the Legal Services Corporation funded at 
the requested level, avoiding the exercise on the House floor we have 
had to go through for the last 6 years to restore cuts made in 
committee that are not supported by a majority in Congress.
  I want to take special occasion to thank the gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Wolf), the chairman of the subcommittee, for the ability to get 
this program funded this way. We always put an amendment on the floor, 
and it passes with bipartisan support and a lot of votes, and I have 
always wondered why we had to do it this way. Well, this bills speaks 
to that issue right away, without having to go through that exercise.
  The full requests for the EEOC and the Civil Rights Commission are 
included, and the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division is funded 
above current services, supporting not only the administration's 
initiatives on voting rights and the rights of the disabled but also an 
initiative to investigate and prosecute civil rights abuses against 
inmates in prisons or other institutions.
  The largest concern we have, however, with this bill is with the 
Small Business Administration, SBA. The administration sent up a budget 
based on unrealistic assumptions about Congress's willingness to 
increase fees for important loan programs and to shift disaster funding 
to a new government-wide emergency fund, neither of which is going to 
happen. The chairman of the subcommittee has done a good job in 
partially restoring these funds, but more needs to be done, and we will 
work with him to be sure the smallest and neediest small businesses are 
not left behind.
  Again, Mr. Chairman, this is a good bill. If our colleagues read the 
minority views in the report, which every subcommittee Democrat signed, 
they will see that we all believe that as long as no harmful floor 
amendments are adopted this bill deserves to pass with a strong 
bipartisan vote.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio 
(Mr. Regula).
  Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the fiscal year 
2002 Commerce, State, Justice bill. I do especially want to commend the 
chairman and the ranking member for crafting a fair and balanced bill 
that takes into account the priorities of the President and the 
Congress.
  I have a special interest in trade issues, and the bill provides full 
funding for the trade agencies which carry out several important 
functions. The trade laws, in view of our economic situation, become 
even more important so that we get not only free trade but fair trade 
in our economy.
  We provide the full funding request for embassy security. I can 
remember as a member of this committee when we were very concerned 
about embassy security, and we traveled to a number of places. It was a 
serious problem. I think the chairman is trying to address that, and it 
is important that he do so.
  We do have full funding for the Legal Services Corporation. I refer 
to that as the equivalent of the Medicaid program in the area of legal 
matters. I know that the new president of the system, one of our former 
colleagues, former Congressman John Erlenborn, will do a great job of 
giving leadership to the Legal Services Corp.
  I especially want to thank the chairman for providing $2.5 million 
for the continuation of the partnership between the JASON project and 
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The JASON project 
is a state-of-the-art education program that brings scientists into 
classrooms through advanced interactive telecommunications technology. 
The program is really designed to excite students about the sciences 
and to encourage them to pursue higher education in the sciences.
  We have had many speeches on this floor about the importance of 
science

[[Page 13523]]

and science education. The JASON project benefits from the scientific 
information and expertise available from NOAA that can be incorporated 
into the JASON curriculum and the annual expedition. It extends 
benefits by encouraging students to become future scientists.
  Finally, I would like to mention the Ohio WEBCHECK program. This 
innovative and award-winning program allows for quick and convenient 
background checks to be completed over the Internet.

                              {time}  1900

  The Ohio system allows fingerprint images of two fingers and two 
thumbs to be electronically transmitted for a criminal background check 
through the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Identification. This is especially 
important for people who are hiring counselors, who are hiring adults 
that deal with children. It avoids a lot of problems.
  Last year, we provided $5 million of Federal funding to hook WebCheck 
into the FBI fingerprint system for a more comprehensive national 
check. I want to thank the chairman for recommending additional funding 
for this project so that it can be completed in a manner that will make 
it possible for all States to set up similar programs and hook them 
into the FBI system.
  Having a quick, convenient, and comprehensive national background 
check system will provide a safer environment for our children and the 
elderly. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this appropriations 
bill.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan).
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time 
to me.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 2500, the 
appropriations measure funding the Departments of Commerce, Justice, 
State, the Judiciary, and related agencies.
  I want to compliment the chairman, who has done a terrific job, the 
gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Wolf), and the ranking member, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), who has done an equally terrific 
job in putting this bill together. By and large, it restores many of 
the cuts proposed in the President's budget request.
  In his budget request, President Bush asked the Congress to rescind 
$10 million from the remaining unobligated balances in the Emergency 
Steel Guarantee Loan Program Account. In response to the President's 
request to rescind the steel loan guarantee money, the committee has 
indeed rescinded it.
  As my colleagues will recall, the Emergency Loan Guarantee Act was 
established in 1999 to assist American steel producers who have been 
battling an onslaught of illegally-dumped foreign steel which has 
crippled the U.S. steel industry.
  Our domestic steel industry is in crisis. There simply is no other 
way to describe it. Approximately 23,000 steelworkers have lost their 
jobs as a result of this crisis, and 18 steel producers have filed for 
bankruptcy. Current import levels still remain well above pre-crisis 
levels.
  President Bush recently requested that the International Trade 
Commission initiate a 2001 investigation on the impact of steel imports 
on our U.S. steel industry.
  Given all of these facts, now is not the time to rescind monies from 
the very fund established to help our domestic steel industry weather 
the storm. I recognize that unobligated balances exist in the account 
created for this program. Changes were needed to make the program more 
accessible to American steel companies without imposing significant 
additional costs on the Federal Government.
  Under the leadership of Senator Byrd, changes to the Emergency Steel 
Loan Guarantee Act were recently approved by the other body. Hopefully, 
these changes will make the program more accessible to more of our 
steel producers.
  That being the case, it seems unwise at this time to rescind funds 
from this important program. I am hopeful that during conference, this 
rescission can be eliminated.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy).
  Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin by 
thanking our chairman, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), for the 
excellent leadership he provided in this subcommittee, and also my 
ranking member, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), for his work 
in this important piece of legislation and all that this legislation is 
going to do to fund important projects.
  As a member of the subcommittee, and a new Member, I know very 
difficult decisions had to be made. While I was pleased with many of 
the decisions that were made, I would like to take this opportunity to 
raise a few of the issues that I believe deserve even greater 
attention.
  First and foremost is the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 
Prevention, which was funded at the same level as last year's request. 
In particular, I want to bring this House's attention to title V of 
OJJTP, which was also held at last year's level.
  There are few areas in government where programs work more 
effectively and we get more of a return on our dollar than in the area 
of title V, which funds critically successful initiatives such as the 
Safe Schools and Healthy Students Program. This helps keep kids out of 
trouble, and it also helps provide flexible resources to our districts. 
Mr. Chairman, I requested a greater allocation in this area.
  In other areas, let me briefly touch upon the area of economic 
development. I think we should not have reduced funding for the EDA, 
the Economic Development Administration, or eliminated funding for the 
New Markets Initiative.
  In addition, I think we should also have pushed more for trade 
agreements and globalization adjustment assistance through the EDA that 
I think will be even more important as we move into a global economy. I 
pointed that out to Secretary Evans and Ambassador Zoellick.
  For our efforts in Native American country, let me say that with even 
modest increases, I believe we could have accomplished much more, 
particularly on Native American reservations where the alcoholism rate 
occurs at 950 percent times the non-native communities .
  With violent crime on the rise on native reservations, and with 90 
percent of it attributed to alcohol-related crime, I think we should be 
putting more resources in this effort.
  Finally, as a Representative of the ``Ocean State,'' Rhode Island, I 
would like to support all those initiatives that go into the National 
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. The administration's 
request in the committee's bill offers funding for programs like Sea 
Grant and Coastal Zone Management, but does not offer enough funding 
for those critical areas like nonpoint source pollution. This is the 
runoff from our highways every time it rains a great deal, and all the 
runoff pollutes our bays. It also affects our fishing stock.
  Let me conclude by once again congratulating the chairman for his 
important leadership, thank the ranking member for his great 
leadership, and say that I look forward to working with both of them on 
continued funding for these priorities that I have just outlined, as 
well as many others that I have not had time to delineate.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Visclosky).
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman very much for 
yielding time to me. I also want to thank the gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Wolf) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) for the fine 
work they have done on this bill. I do plan to support it.
  I rise now to indicate my concern over a provision mentioned by my 
colleague, the gentleman from West Virginia, a few minutes ago about 
the rescission of $10 million from the $145 million Steel Loan 
Guarantee Program.

[[Page 13524]]

  The problems that the steel industry faces are manyfold, but one is 
the complete collapse of the ability to get financing, as well as the 
number of companies now that find themselves in bankruptcy in the 
United States of America.
  Since December 31, 1997, we have now had 18 companies declare 
bankruptcy, and one of the concerns that the industry faces is securing 
financing. We have a loan guarantee program in place. It took a period 
of time to get up and running with it. There were initially some 
problems as far as the bureaucracy contained therein, and the problem 
continues to persist as far as securing the guarantees for private 
investment firms to loan the industry money. Today those guarantees are 
at 85 percent.
  Given the fact that 21 percent of all steel capacity in the United 
States of America today is in bankruptcy, I think the provision in this 
bill sends a very negative and very bad signal to those financial 
institutions as far as reduction in the monies that will be available 
for those guarantees for the fiscal year. We are not only talking about 
tonnage in bankruptcy, we are not only talking about companies in 
bankruptcy, we are talking about people.
  The fact is, we have 42,556 Americans working for those 18 companies, 
some of which may not make it without this loan guarantee program. We 
have to couple that with the 23,000 people who, over the last 2\1/2\ 
years, have also lost their jobs in this industry.
  I am concerned that this program has a rescission attached to it. I 
would hope that it can be rectified in conference with the Senate at 
some future date.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to clarify something. There were a number 
of questions by Members with regard to the gun safety lock issue. I 
would like to make a clarification for the Record in the interest of 
this.
  Regarding the distribution of gun safety locks, the report 
accompanying this bill expresses the committee's support for the use of 
gun safety locks, and would encourage the distribution of these locks 
to handgun owners.
  The report also expresses the committee's concern regarding reports 
that some of these safety locks have failed or do not work on certain 
handguns. We understand that the Department of Justice is reviewing the 
availability of standards for gun safety locks, and private industry 
groups have also sought the promulgation of such standards.
  The report directs the Department of Justice to develop national 
standards for gun safety locks. The committee intends for the 
Department to consult with private industry groups and other interested 
parties in the development of these standards.
  Further, we understand the interim standard for gun safety locks 
could be in place in 6 months.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Dicks).
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in very strong support of this 
important legislation. I want to first of all thank the chairman, the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), in his first year as Chairman of 
this important appropriations subcommittee, and the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Serrano), the ranking Democratic member and his staff. I 
particularly want to tell them how much I appreciate their cooperation 
in funding the so-called ``conservation amendment.''
  Last year, the Congress adopted a provision that started at $1.6 
billion last year and will increase up to $2.4 billion by 2006 based on 
the Violent Crime Trust Fund model, which keeps the authority for 
spending for these important conservation programs, of which there are 
$443 million in this bill, within the jurisdiction of the Committee on 
Appropriations, and allows us to have annual oversight.
  But what it has done is double and now even more than double the 
amount of money that is available for conservation spending.
  There were some last year who were advocating an entitlement that 
would have taken this off the budget. I just want to compliment the 
chairman and the ranking member for helping us keep our commitment and 
telling the people of the country that we, the appropriators, are just 
as interested in conservation. We have programs like coastal zone 
management, the Pacific salmon recovery initiative, and they go on and 
on and on, that will be benefited by this important provision. I am 
pleased that, when we add this up, it is $1.76 billion for conservation 
this year between the Interior appropriations bill and State, Justice, 
and Commerce.
  Out in my part of the world, we are fighting to try and restore the 
salmon runs in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, California, and in Alaska 
that have been severely hurt.
  This money, 110 million for the Pacific Salmon Recovery program, goes 
back to our Governors and then through programs for habitat recovery 
which is absolutely essential. The bill also provides an additional 25 
million to the U.S. Canada Pacific Salmon Treaty program. I want to say 
how much I support this bill. I urge the House to give overwhelming 
support for this important legislation.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
New York (Ms. Velazquez), the ranking member of the Committee on Small 
Business.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time 
to me.
  Mr. Chairman, today's bill provides funding for many critical 
priorities. I believe that the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Wolf) 
and the ranking member, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), have 
produced a bill that is an improvement over the past years. I thank 
them for their hard work on this legislation, which benefits many.
  Unfortunately, I am afraid their hard work has fallen short for one 
of the most productive forces for America today, our small businesses. 
This bill will severely cut the Small Business Administration's funding 
level.

                              {time}  1915

  The recent ``long boom,'' our greatest in history, came as a direct 
result of the productivity of American small companies and 
entrepreneurs. Small businesses employ half our workers, account for 
half our GDP, and grow almost 60 percent faster than large 
corporations.
  Mr. Speaker, much of this success has been made possible through the 
programs of the Small Business Administration. But this bill will cut 
SBA's tap that currently provides capital liquidity to small business 
across the country. It will, I fear, dry up assistance just when we 
most need to give our economy a boost.
  This bill proposes to cut funding for the SBA from $860 million this 
year to $728 million next year. Ten programs will be zeroed out and 
another half dozen or more will be so severely underfunded as to render 
them ineffective.
  Later today, my colleague, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. 
Kelly), and I will offer an amendment to restore $17 million in funding 
for SBA. While still short of last year's level, our amendment will 
maintain the very successful 7(a) general long guarantee program and 
two small business assistance programs, PRIME and BusinessLinc.
  Our amendment is important because small business is big business in 
America. We aim to support the SBA's mission of providing technical 
assistance and guarantees to today's entrepreneurs, who are often 
tomorrow's Intel, Apple, or FedEx. Most importantly, we want to provide 
the tools that help so many better themselves, their families and their 
communities. That is the point, after all, of a strong economy.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my long-time 
colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley).
  Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Commerce,

[[Page 13525]]

Justice, State bill, and would like to express my gratitude to the 
chairman, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), for his hard work in 
crafting this bipartisan bill. I would also like to recognize my good 
friend, the gentleman from the Bronx, New York, (Mr. Serrano), who has 
worked tirelessly for his constituents, for all of New York City, and 
for all of America from his position on the Committee on Appropriations 
and throughout his many, many years in Congress.
  With regard to international issues, as both the representative of 
one of the most diverse congressional districts in the Nation and a 
member of the Committee on International Relations, I would like to 
applaud this committee for recognizing the value inherent in the United 
States playing a key role in the international community and in 
particular supporting international peacekeeping operations.
  Here at home, this legislation also provides important funding for a 
number of community service and anti-crime programs, effective programs 
that have helped our Nation, especially my hometown of New York City, 
experience the lowest crime rate in decades. We need to continue to 
invest in our people, both here in the U.S. and abroad. This bill does 
that, and I congratulate the chairman and the ranking member for their 
work and for their dedication.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would advise the Members that the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) has 10\1/2\ minutes remaining, and the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) has 10 minutes remaining.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), our ranking member.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I simply would like to do two things: first 
of all, congratulate the gentleman for the bill he has brought to us. I 
obviously do not agree with all of it, but I certainly intend to 
support it unless some surprises occur on the House floor. I think he 
has done a good job.
  Having said that, I would like to try to determine whether or not we 
can reach a reasonable understanding about what our plans are for this 
evening. The problem we face is that at this point we have some 31 
amendments filed, we have other amendments that are being faxed to the 
leadership on both sides of the aisle, and the longer that this process 
goes on, the more amendments we are going to have to deal with for the 
remainder of consideration of this bill.
  I would simply rise at this point to say that I would like to see us 
reach an agreement under which we could ask all Members to have their 
amendments in tonight so that we would be able tomorrow to try to work 
out time agreements on all these subsequent amendments. And if we can 
do that, we can have some chance of finishing the bill either tomorrow 
or early the next day.
  The problem we face, as I understand it, is that this committee is 
not going to be allowed back on the floor tomorrow morning. We are 
going to be superceded by another bill, and I am told by majority staff 
that that means we are not likely to get to the floor until 2:30 or 3 
p.m. tomorrow afternoon. If that is the case, and if we have 60 
amendments pending, there is no way on God's green earth we will even 
finish this bill tomorrow.
  So it seems to me if we want to accelerate our opportunity to finish 
this bill, we would first of all try to get an agreement that Members, 
if they want amendments considered, would have to get them in tonight; 
and then we can try tomorrow, while the other bill is being worked on, 
the gentleman from Virginia and the gentleman from New York can try to 
work out a time agreement on whatever amendments we have remaining.
  I just want the House to understand that I am perfectly willing to 
try to work out these arrangements, but we have been in committee since 
10 a.m. this morning. We did not start this bill until 7 p.m. That was 
not our call; it was the majority that did the scheduling, and it seems 
to me that we ought to know that we will get out of here at a 
reasonable time tonight. I do not enjoy the prospect of having 
amendments being debated here and Members coming in in the middle of 
the night having no idea what we have been debating and voting on the 
fly. I do not think that serves the interest of this institution.
  So I want to notice the House that if we cannot get an agreement on a 
reasonable time to get out of here tonight, I will begin a series of 
motions; and we are not going to get very far on this bill.
  With that, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha).
  Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, in 1998 this House passed landmark 
legislation. We passed legislation trying to get the Justice Department 
under control. Some of my colleagues may remember Joe McDade, who was a 
personal friend to many of us and who went through 8 years of the 
Justice Department investigating him and indicting him; and then, in 
about 4 hours of deliberation by a jury, he was found not guilty.
  We passed legislation then saying that the Justice Department would 
have to reimburse out of their money anybody that was indicted and not 
convicted. That still stands today. We also passed legislation that 
said any prosecutor, meaning any U.S. Attorney, must practice under the 
State laws, the ethics of the State laws. Well, the Justice Department, 
some U.S. Attorneys, have fought us all during this period of time. 
Matter of fact, in this legislation, prosecutors from all over the 
country came to this body, lobbied against us, the White House lobbied 
against us, and we beat them 350 to 50. Why? Because there was no 
confidence in the Justice Department. No confidence in the FBI.
  During that trial, Joe McDade, where they charged him as a 
subcommittee chairman with racketeering, they charged him with illegal 
gratuities, meaning campaign contributions; they charged him with 
bribes, meaning honorariums. They leaked information during this entire 
6 years. I sat by Joe McDade when I was chairman of the committee and 
he was the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Defense, and every day 
he deteriorated in health and emotional stability, and it ruined his 
life for 8 years. He was acquitted, but he still has not gotten over 
this.
  Now, the point I am making today is that I was prepared to introduce 
legislation, because two of the things that were introduced that were 
thrown out in conference, and it was an omnibus bill, is that there 
would be an independent counsel investigate the Justice Department and 
then it would publicize what happened to the people that did 
wrongdoing. Those two things were thrown out. Now, I have hesitated 
since that time because the Justice Department kept saying we are going 
to get it under control. Well, I find the new Deputy Attorney General 
has said some things that give me confidence that he is going to try to 
get the FBI and the Justice Department under control. I have confidence 
the new FBI director realizes that the public has lost confidence in 
the FBI.
  As a matter of fact, this House would not have voted 350 to 50 to 
condemn or to put controls on the Justice Department and the U.S. 
Attorneys if it had not been for the lack of confidence of the public 
throughout this great country. But I am not going to offer that 
amendment, those two amendments, because I believe the new Attorney 
General and the Deputy Attorney General and the FBI director are moving 
in the right direction. But I hope by this time next year that this 
subject will be a subject of the past and people will regain confidence 
in the FBI and the Justice Department.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes. I just wanted to 
tell the chairman, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), that the 
comments of the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) are well taken by 
this ranking member.
  We want to work out the best possible situation to work in the proper 
manner and in the way that we will do justice to the bill and to the 
amendments and to the Members. I will agree

[[Page 13526]]

also to a time limit on amendments. However, I must say once again, as 
I did last year, and in a loud voice, that I cannot understand why it 
is that we put a rule on the floor that is open-ended and then we 
immediately move to curtail.
  So next year, if I am still around in this situation, I assure my 
colleague that I will oppose any rule that is open-ended, because it is 
really not an open-ended rule. But I will support time limitations to 
make the process move forward.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) for a colloquy.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time, and I want to engage in this colloquy regarding the 
Congressional Executive Commission on the People's Republic of China.
  As the chairman knows, the Congressional-Executive Commission on the 
People's Republic of China is being created pursuant to P.L. No. 106-
286. This Member is pleased to note the distinguished gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Wolf) is also a member of this important commission 
designed to report on human rights development and the rule of law in 
the People's Republic of China.
  Because it was expected to take considerable time to bring the 
commission's operations into being, including the actual naming of the 
congressional and executive branch members, the fiscal year 2001 
appropriation was set at only $.5 million. We expect the commission 
will begin functioning in the coming weeks. Therefore, in anticipation 
of a full active commission, this Member had earlier suggested an 
amount of $1.5 million to cover the commission's operations for the 
full fiscal year of 2002.
  This Member would ask the chairman about his willingness to seek 
adequate funding for the commission, as we would certainly trust the 
chairman's judgment in seeking such adequate funding in conference.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BEREUTER. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. LEVIN. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, I would 
strongly support what the gentleman from Nebraska has proposed.

                              {time}  1930

  As relating to the appropriations for the Congressional Executive 
Commission on China, currently half a million is appropriated for that 
Commission. We understand that the gentleman's staff is in agreement 
that the Commission needs $1.5 million for fiscal year 2002 and that 
the gentleman, the distinguished chairman, will pursue $1.5 million for 
fiscal year 2002 in conference.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BEREUTER. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Michigan is absolutely 
correct, quite frankly, if they needed $2 million to do a good job, 
particularly with regard to China, but we will agree and make sure that 
that $1.5 million is in there as per the request of the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin).
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes and 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest).
  Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding me 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the chairman for the inclusion of 
funding for marine protected areas in this bill.
  In the Chesapeake Bay we are already using marine protected areas to 
ensure the recovery of species such as oysters and blue crabs. We are 
finding that with the involvement of recreational and commercial 
fishermen as well as Federal, State and local governments, marine 
protected areas will play a critical role in restoring over-exploited 
fish species.
  As chairman of the subcommittee on this issue, I am a strong 
proponent of using a variety of types of marine protected areas to 
ensure conservation and sustainable use of our marine resources in the 
Chesapeake and throughout our Nation's waters.
  The President's funding request for marine protected areas is based 
upon this principle as described in Executive Order 13158, which reads, 
in part, ``An expanded and strengthened comprehensive system of marine 
protected areas throughout the marine environment would enhance the 
conservation of our Nation's natural and cultural marine heritage and 
the ecologically and economically sustainable use of the marine 
environment for the future generations.''
  We feel that including the President's executive order in this 
colloquy is fundamental to sound marine resources.
  I would like to conclude, is it the intent of the chairman that the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration may use funds 
appropriated for implementation of the Marine Protected Areas Executive 
Order 13158, as supported by the Secretary of Commerce on June 4, 2001, 
and in accordance with the President's budget request?
  Specifically, in addition to direction given in the committee report 
for NOAA to develop a marine protected atlas, is it the intent of the 
chairman that funds may be used to implement the full scope of the 
Executive Order 13158, including the implementation of the Marine 
Protected Area Federal Advisory Committee, the development of a 
framework for communication amongst agencies and programs that utilize 
marine protected areas, and the consultation with State and local 
partners in preparation for expanding the scope of the Nation's marine 
protected areas?
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GILCHREST. I yield to the chairman.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his interest in the 
Chesapeake Bay. Quite frankly, no one has done more for the bay than 
the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest).
  The committee does not intend to limit the ability of NOAA to 
implement the Executive Order 13158 on marine protected areas. 
Furthermore, the committee fully supports the President's budget 
request for marine protected areas.
  Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the chairman for 
his help in this issue.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I will yield myself whatever time I may 
consume in closing.
  Notwithstanding the fact that there are some things, mechanics, that 
we have to work out as to the debate and how we handle amendments and 
everything else, I just wanted to close on this side by saying, as I 
said before, that this is a good bill, that Chairman Wolf has done a 
great job with both staffs in putting together a bill that we can 
support, as we heard from our ranking member, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin, Mr. Obey.
  As I said, notwithstanding whatever other problems we have, he 
intends to support the bill. I am hoping after all is said and done no 
harmful amendments have hurt the bill in any way. In that case, at this 
moment I would ask for all Members in bipartisan fashion to support the 
bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  Mr. Chairman, I will thank the gentleman. This will be the last time 
I thank him for his comments. I think there will be no negative 
amendments like that, and I ask Members on final passage to support the 
bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Ehlers).
  Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the legislation. As 
the chairman of the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology and 
Standards, which has jurisdiction over NOAA and NIST programs within 
the Department of Commerce, I wish to commend the new chairman of the 
Subcommittee on

[[Page 13527]]

Commerce, Justice and State on crafting this appropriations bill.
  Most Americans do not realize that NOAA makes up over 65 percent of 
the Department of Commerce's budget, covering a wide range of programs 
from studying our climate to mapping the ocean floor.
  I am pleased to see that the subcommittee has recognized the 
importance of NOAA and has funded the agency at a level slightly above 
the President's request for fiscal year 2002.
  I am also pleased that the appropriations bill increases funding for 
labs inside of the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Over 
the past 100 years, NIST and its employees have not let us down. It is 
all but impossible to name a major innovation which has improved our 
quality of life with which NIST has not had some involvement. NIST 
Federal laboratories have partnered with industry to initiate 
innovations for safer and more fuel-efficient automobiles, biomedical 
breakthroughs like breast cancer diagnostics, refrigerant and air 
conditioning standards, analysis of DNA, and calibrations for wireless 
telecommunication systems, among numerous others.
  Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the increase for NIST labs, and I 
hope that the chairman will be able to preserve this funding during 
conference negotiations with the Senate.
  Mr. Chairman, let me highlight a few key programs that are funded by 
this bill: the Sea Grant program, which provides grants supporting 
vital marine research and education programs at universities all across 
the country; the Great Lakes Environmental Lab, which has a solid 
history of important scientific contributions and ensures continued 
high-quality coastal science. It also fully funds the ARGO Float 
Program, which is crucial to global climate studies which have taken on 
increased importance to us.
  In addition, it provides National Weather Service forecasts and 
warnings which more than pays for itself, monitors the water levels of 
the Great Lakes, and plays a major change in climate change research. 
This bill will help ensure that NOAA is able to fulfill its many 
missions, and that NIST will continue to serve our country well.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. WATTS of Oklahoma, Mr. Chairman, today I rise to support H.R. 
2500, the Commerce Justice State Appropriations Act. Mr. Chairman, by 
passing this bill the House will take an important stand against 
methamphetamine production across this country.
  The drug, Methamphetamine, has become one of the most dangerous items 
on our streets. This drug is composed of products like rat poison, 
Comet, bleach, and lighter fluid. This drug can be injected, inhaled, 
or smoked. People around this country are spending their hard earned 
money to inject into their veins rat poison and bleach that was mixed 
in somebody's toilet. The negative effects of this on the human body 
are horrendous: insomnia, depression, malnutrition, liver failure, 
brain damage, and death.
  This terrible drug not only affects those who use it but can also be 
deadly to innocent Americans whose homes are near these labs. In my 
home state of Oklahoma in 2000, we had over 1,000 methamphetamine labs 
explode and need to be cleaned up by the Oklahoma State Bureau of 
Investigation. In 1994, there were eleven meth labs, let me repeat that 
six years ago there were 11 meth labs in my home state of Oklahoma, now 
there are over 1,000. And, every time one of these labs explodes 
families are exposed to toxic and lethal fumes that are disbursed to 
the surrounding neighborhood. Innocent young children and seniors are 
rushed to the emergency room to be treated for inhalation of these 
toxic and deadly fumes.
  By passing H.R. 2500, the House will fund $48.3 million dollars to 
state and local law enforcement agencies to help combat methamphetamine 
production and meth lab cleanup. This money will start to turn back the 
tide against these labs, and protect our families and neighborhoods. 
This money will be used to train officers to find these labs and most 
importantly clean the toxic remains of these labs.
  Mr. Chairman, I commend you and your committee for including the 
people of Oklahoma in this Methamphetamine HotSpots program. This money 
is desperately needed to keep Oklahoma neighborhoods safe.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to stand with me today against 
this dangerous, deadly drug and support H.R. 2500 the Commerce Justice 
State Appropriations Act.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank CJS Subcommittee Chairman 
Frank Wolf and Senior Democratic Member Jose Serrano for working hard 
to provide adequate funding for the Department of Justice's portion of 
the Indian Country Law Enforcement initiative. I am pleased that the 
subcommittee funded the Indian Programs that are included in the Indian 
Country Law enforcement initiative at the levels contained in the 
President's fiscal year 2002 budget request.
  I, however, hope that as this bill makes its way through the 
legislative process, that you will support funding increases for the 
following items:
  1. Cops grant set aside for Indians.
  2. Tribal Courts.
  3. Indian alcohol and substance abuse programs.
  4. Title V Grants that support tribal juvenile justice systems.
  5. Grants to fund the construction of detention facilities in Indian 
Country.
  6. Tribal criminal justice statistics collection.
  Mr. Chairman, each of those programs are critical to the tribal 
justice systems. While national crime rates continue to drop, crime 
rates on Indian lands continue to rise. What is particularly disturbing 
is the violent nature of Indian country crime: violence against women, 
juvenile and gang crime, and child abuse remain serious problems.
  In its 1999 report, American Indians and Crime, the Bureau of Justice 
Statistics found that American Indians and Alaska Natives have the 
highest crime victimization rates in the nation, almost twice the rate 
of the nation as a whole.
  The report revealed that violence against American Indian women is 
higher than other groups. That American Indians suffer the nation's 
highest rate of child abuse. Since 1994, Indian juveniles in federal 
custody increased by 50%. Even more troubling is that 55% of violent 
crime against American Indians, the victims report that the offender 
was under the influence of alcohol, drugs or both. That figure 
represents the highest rate of any group in the nation.
  Mr. Chairman, the Department of Justice and the Department of 
Interior developed the Indian country law enforcement initiative to 
improve the public safety and criminal justice in Indian communities.
  Let us work together to increase the funding levels in conference and 
provide the tribal justice systems with the funding necessary to combat 
criminal activity in Indian country.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chair may accord 
priority in recognition to a Member offering an amendment that he has 
printed in the designated place in the Congressional Record. Those 
amendments will be considered read.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 2500

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes, namely:

                     TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

                         General Administration


                         salaries and expenses

       For expenses necessary for the administration of the 
     Department of Justice, $91,668,000, of which not to exceed 
     $3,317,000 is for the Facilities Program 2000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That not to exceed 43 
     permanent positions and 44 full-time equivalent workyears and 
     $8,451,000 shall be expended for the Department Leadership 
     Program exclusive of augmentation that occurred in these 
     offices in fiscal year 2001: Provided further, That not to 
     exceed 41 permanent positions and 48 full-time equivalent 
     workyears and $4,997,000 shall be expended for the Offices of 
     Legislative Affairs and Public Affairs: Provided further, 
     That the latter two aforementioned offices may utilize non-
     reimbursable details of career employees within the caps 
     described in the preceding proviso: Provided further, That 
     the Attorney General is authorized to transfer, under such 
     terms and conditions as the Attorney General shall specify, 
     forfeited real or personal property of limited or marginal 
     value, as such value is determined by guidelines established 
     by the Attorney General, to a State or local government 
     agency, or its designated contractor or transferee, for use 
     to support drug abuse treatment, drug and crime prevention 
     and education, housing, job skills, and other community-based 
     public health

[[Page 13528]]

     and safety programs: Provided further, That any transfer 
     under the preceding proviso shall not create or confer any 
     private right of action in any person against the United 
     States, and shall be treated as a reprogramming under section 
     605 of this Act.

  Ms. CARSON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Boys and Girls Clubs of 
America. I support its continued funding, which equals last year's 
level.
  The Commerce-Justice-State appropriations bill gives the National 
Institute of Justice authority to use Local Law Enforcement Block 
Grants to support the Boys and Girls Clubs.
  The Boys and Girls Clubs offer young people the ability to know that 
someone cares about them. Club programs and services promote and 
enhance the development of boys and girls by instilling a sense of 
competence, usefulness, belonging, and influence.
  These clubs give young people a chance to go during their free time 
where they can interact with others in a positive social environment.
  The clubs serve over 3.3 million boys and girls. This is in over 
2,800 locations around the world. About one half of those are from 
single parent families and almost two-thirds are from minority 
families.
  The challenges these children must cope with outstrip problems faced 
by previous generations. Drug, gang, and gun-related violence has risen 
to previously unimaginable heights. But their place of refuge has not 
changed, because Boys and Girls Clubs continue to do what they do 
best--using proven programs and caring staff to save lives.
  The Boys and Girls Clubs teaches young people in many areas of life. 
These include: character and leadership, education and career, health 
and life skills, the arts, sports, fitness and recreation, and 
specialized programs.
  Most important is the Boys and Girls Clubs is neighborhood based--an 
actual place for the children to go--designed solely for youth programs 
and activities.
  Support the Boys and Girls Clubs of America.


                Amendment Offered by Mr. Brady of Texas

  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Brady of Texas:
       Page 2, line 7, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $2,500,000)''.

       Page 57, line 14, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(decreased by $5,000,000)''.

       Page 71, line 4, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $2,500,000)''.

  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is simple. I want to 
ensure that the Department of State and the Department of Justice have 
the resources they need to start the process to close safe havens 
around the world for fugitives who commit crimes in America and flee 
our justice.
  We can do this by updating and modernizing extradition treaties, as 
well as negotiating new ones. This problem is growing. The world is 
getting smaller; and whereas in the past criminals would flee to the 
county or State line to flee justice, today they flee the country and 
even the continent. We have more than 3,000 indicted criminals who have 
fled America and are out of our reach. The crimes they have committed 
or are charged with are serious. They include murder, terrorism, drug 
trafficking, child abduction, money laundering, financial fraud, and 
the new growing area of cybercrime.
  Currently, America has international extradition agreements with only 
60 percent of the world's countries. Unfortunately, it is important to 
note that nearly half of these were enacted before World War II, so 
they are hopelessly outdated. Even the others, State Department 
officials tell us those enacted prior to 1970 are basically ineffective 
because only specific crimes are listed in the treaties as 
extraditable, and crimes have changed a lot in the last three decades.
  Mr. Chairman, we have crimes that are growing and criminals who are 
fleeing more and more, with criminal justice tools that are more 
outdated and less effective. This is not justice. It is not fair to the 
victims of these crimes, and it is not acceptable any longer.
  Mr. Chairman, I am always cautious about how and where the hard-
earned dollars of the American taxpayer are spent. More funding is 
necessary to help close these safe havens. Furthermore, this is 
something that can only be done by our Federal Government. It will not 
happen overnight. It will take many years, but we are capable of doing 
it.
  Mr. Chairman, I had a provision inserted in the State Department 
fiscal year 2000 authorization bill requiring them to report back to us 
on our extradition agreements. I must say I was disappointed in the 
report. They seemed to gloss over the problems, perhaps to put politics 
over justice.
  I am hopeful that the new administration will take a stronger 
position on closing these safe havens. This amendment is strictly 
designed to urge the new leadership of the Justice Department and State 
Department to let Congress know that we are serious about closing these 
safe havens, that we want both agencies to work together and with 
Congress to update our treaties and to work toward the day where there 
is nowhere on this world to hide for those who commit crimes against 
America.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Texas has played a leading 
role in trying to close safe havens abroad, and I share his desire to 
do that.
  In response to the gentleman's concerns, the committee has included 
report language for the Department of State to work with the Department 
of Justice to bolster our efforts to negotiate extradition treaties.
  We expect that the Department of Justice and Department of State will 
use increased funding in fiscal year 2002 for this purpose. Let me add, 
if the gentleman from Texas would like, after we move beyond debate and 
pass the bill, we can have a meeting with Department of Justice and 
Department of State to make sure that they know the intensity that both 
of us feel with regard to this.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Virginia 
for his efforts. With his commitment to ensure that the Department of 
Justice and Department of State are being provided with the necessary 
resources and that these agencies understand that Congress expects them 
to put a greater emphasis on negotiating and enforcing extradition 
treaties, Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The amendment is withdrawn.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                     joint automated booking system

       For expenses necessary for the nationwide deployment of a 
     Joint Automated Booking System including automated capability 
     to transmit fingerprint and image data, $15,957,000, to 
     remain available until expended.


                       narrowband communications

       For the costs of conversion to narrowband communications, 
     including the cost for operation and maintenance of Land 
     Mobile Radio legacy systems, $104,615,000, to remain 
     available until expended.


                         Counterterrorism Fund

       For necessary expenses, as determined by the Attorney 
     General, $4,989,000, to remain available until expended, to 
     reimburse any Department of Justice organization for: (1) the 
     costs incurred in reestablishing the operational capability 
     of an office or facility which has been damaged or destroyed 
     as a result of any domestic or international terrorist 
     incident; and (2) the costs of providing support to counter, 
     investigate or prosecute domestic or international terrorism, 
     including payment of rewards in connection with these 
     activities: Provided, That any Federal agency may be 
     reimbursed for the costs of detaining in foreign countries 
     individuals accused of acts of terrorism that violate the 
     laws of the United States: Provided further, That funds 
     provided under this paragraph shall be available only after 
     the Attorney General notifies the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate 
     in accordance with section 605 of this Act.


                   Administrative Review and Appeals

       For expenses necessary for the administration of pardon and 
     clemency petitions and immigration-related activities, 
     $178,751,000.

[[Page 13529]]




                           Detention Trustee

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Detention Trustee who 
     shall exercise all power and functions authorized by law 
     relating to the detention of Federal prisoners in non-Federal 
     institutions or otherwise in the custody of the United States 
     Marshals Service; and the detention of aliens in the custody 
     of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, $1,721,000: 
     Provided, That the Trustee shall be responsible for 
     overseeing construction of detention facilities or for 
     housing related to such detention; the management of funds 
     appropriated to the Department for the exercise of any 
     detention functions; and the direction of the United States 
     Marshals Service and Immigration and Naturalization Service 
     with respect to the exercise of detention policy setting and 
     operations for the Department.


                      Office of Inspector General

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended, $50,735,000; including not to exceed 
     $10,000 to meet unforeseen emergencies of a confidential 
     character, to be expended under the direction of, and to be 
     accounted for solely under the certificate of, the Attorney 
     General; and for the acquisition, lease, maintenance, and 
     operation of motor vehicles, without regard to the general 
     purchase price limitation for the current fiscal year.

                    United States Parole Commission


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the United States Parole 
     Commission as authorized by law, $10,915,000.

                            Legal Activities


            Salaries and Expenses, General Legal Activities

       For expenses necessary for the legal activities of the 
     Department of Justice, not otherwise provided for, including 
     not to exceed $20,000 for expenses of collecting evidence, to 
     be expended under the direction of, and to be accounted for 
     solely under the certificate of, the Attorney General; and 
     rent of private or Government-owned space in the District of 
     Columbia, $568,011,000; of which not to exceed $10,000,000 
     for litigation support contracts shall remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That of the funds available in this 
     appropriation, $18,835,000 shall remain available until 
     expended only for office automation systems for the legal 
     divisions covered by this appropriation, and for the United 
     States Attorneys, the Antitrust Division, the United States 
     Trustee Program, the Executive Office for Immigration Review, 
     the Community Relations Service, and offices funded through 
     ``Salaries and Expenses'', General Administration: Provided 
     further, That of the total amount appropriated, not to exceed 
     $1,000 shall be available to the United States National 
     Central Bureau, INTERPOL, for official reception and 
     representation expenses: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon a 
     determination by the Attorney General that emergent 
     circumstances require additional funding for litigation 
     activities of the Civil Division, the Attorney General may 
     transfer such amounts to ``Salaries and Expenses, General 
     Legal Activities'' from available appropriations for the 
     current fiscal year for the Department of Justice, as may be 
     necessary to respond to such circumstances: Provided further, 
     That any transfer pursuant to the previous proviso shall be 
     treated as a reprogramming under section 605 of this Act and 
     shall not be available for obligation or expenditure except 
     in compliance with the procedures set forth in that section.
       In addition, for reimbursement of expenses of the 
     Department of Justice associated with processing cases under 
     the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, as 
     amended, not to exceed $4,028,000, to be appropriated from 
     the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund.


               Salaries and Expenses, Antitrust Division

       For expenses necessary for the enforcement of antitrust and 
     kindred laws, $105,366,000: Provided, That, notwithstanding 
     section 3302(b) of title 31, United States Code, not to 
     exceed $105,366,000 of offsetting collections derived from 
     fees collected in fiscal year 2002 for premerger notification 
     filings under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements 
     Act of 1976 (15 U.S.C. 18a) shall be retained and used for 
     necessary expenses in this appropriation, and shall remain 
     available until expended: Provided further, That the sum 
     herein appropriated from the general fund shall be reduced as 
     such offsetting collections are received during fiscal year 
     2002, so as to result in a final fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation from the general fund estimated at not more 
     than $0.


             Salaries and Expenses, United States Attorneys

       For necessary expenses of the Offices of the United States 
     Attorneys, including inter-governmental and cooperative 
     agreements, $1,353,968,000; of which not to exceed $2,500,000 
     shall be available until September 30, 2003, for: (1) 
     training personnel in debt collection; (2) locating debtors 
     and their property; (3) paying the net costs of selling 
     property; and (4) tracking debts owed to the United States 
     Government: Provided, That of the total amount appropriated, 
     not to exceed $8,000 shall be available for official 
     reception and representation expenses: Provided further, That 
     not to exceed $10,000,000 of those funds available for 
     automated litigation support contracts shall remain available 
     until expended: Provided further, That not to exceed 
     $2,500,000 for the operation of the National Advocacy Center 
     shall remain available until expended: Provided further, 
     That, in addition to reimbursable full-time equivalent 
     workyears available to the Offices of the United States 
     Attorneys, not to exceed 9,571 positions and 9,776 full-time 
     equivalent workyears shall be supported from the funds 
     appropriated in this Act for the United States Attorneys.


                   United States Trustee System Fund

       For necessary expenses of the United States Trustee 
     Program, as authorized by 28 U.S.C. 589a(a), $145,937,000, to 
     remain available until expended and to be derived from the 
     United States Trustee System Fund: Provided, That, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, deposits to the 
     Fund shall be available in such amounts as may be necessary 
     to pay refunds due depositors: Provided further, That, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, $145,937,000 of 
     offsetting collections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 589a(b) shall be 
     retained and used for necessary expenses in this 
     appropriation and remain available until expended: Provided 
     further, That the sum herein appropriated from the Fund shall 
     be reduced as such offsetting collections are received during 
     fiscal year 2002, so as to result in a final fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation from the Fund estimated at $0.


      Salaries and Expenses, Foreign Claims Settlement Commission

       For expenses necessary to carry out the activities of the 
     Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, including services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $1,136,000.


         Salaries and Expenses, United States Marshals Service

       For necessary expenses of the United States Marshals 
     Service, including the acquisition, lease, maintenance, and 
     operation of vehicles, and the purchase of passenger motor 
     vehicles for police-type use, without regard to the general 
     purchase price limitation for the current fiscal year, 
     $622,646,000; of which not to exceed $6,000 shall be 
     available for official reception and representation expenses; 
     and of which not to exceed $4,000,000 for development, 
     implementation, maintenance and support, and training for an 
     automated prisoner information system shall remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That, in addition to reimbursable 
     full-time equivalent workyears available to the United States 
     Marshals Service, not to exceed 4,128 positions and 3,993 
     full-time equivalent workyears shall be supported from the 
     funds appropriated in this Act for the United States Marshals 
     Service.


                              Construction

       For planning, constructing, renovating, equipping, and 
     maintaining United States Marshals Service prisoner-holding 
     space in United States courthouses and Federal buildings, 
     including the renovation and expansion of prisoner movement 
     areas, elevators, and sallyports, $6,628,000 to remain 
     available until expended.


                       Federal Prisoner Detention

       For expenses, related to United States prisoners in the 
     custody of the United States Marshals Service, but not 
     including expenses otherwise provided for in appropriations 
     available to the Attorney General, $724,682,000, to remain 
     available until expended.


                     Fees and Expenses of Witnesses

       For expenses, mileage, compensation, and per diems of 
     witnesses, for expenses of contracts for the procurement and 
     supervision of expert witnesses, for private counsel 
     expenses, and for per diems in lieu of subsistence, as 
     authorized by law, including advances, $148,494,000, to 
     remain available until expended; of which not to exceed 
     $6,000,000 may be made available for planning, construction, 
     renovations, maintenance, remodeling, and repair of 
     buildings, and the purchase of equipment incident thereto, 
     for protected witness safesites; of which not to exceed 
     $1,000,000 may be made available for the purchase and 
     maintenance of armored vehicles for transportation of 
     protected witnesses; and of which not to exceed $5,000,000 
     may be made available for the purchase, installation, and 
     maintenance of secure telecommunications equipment and a 
     secure automated information network to store and retrieve 
     the identities and locations of protected witnesses.


           Salaries and Expenses, Community Relations Service

       For necessary expenses of the Community Relations Service, 
     $9,269,000 and, in addition, up to $1,000,000 of funds made 
     available to the Department of Justice in this Act may be 
     transferred by the Attorney General to this account: 
     Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     upon a determination by the Attorney General that emergent 
     circumstances require additional funding for conflict 
     prevention and resolution activities of the Community 
     Relations Service, the Attorney General may transfer such 
     amounts to the Community Relations Service, from available 
     appropriations for

[[Page 13530]]

     the current fiscal year for the Department of Justice, as may 
     be necessary to respond to such circumstances: Provided 
     further, That any transfer pursuant to the previous proviso 
     shall be treated as a reprogramming under section 605 of this 
     Act and shall not be available for obligation or expenditure 
     except in compliance with the procedures set forth in that 
     section.


                         Assets Forfeiture Fund

       For expenses authorized by 28 U.S.C. 524(c)(1)(A)(ii), (B), 
     (F), and (G), as amended, $21,949,000, to be derived from the 
     Department of Justice Assets Forfeiture Fund.

                    Radiation Exposure Compensation


                        Administrative Expenses

       For necessary administrative expenses in accordance with 
     the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, $1,996,000.


         Payment to Radiation Exposure Compensation Trust Fund

       For payments to the Radiation Exposure Compensation Trust 
     Fund of claims covered by the Radiation Exposure Compensation 
     Act as in effect on June 1, 2000, $10,776,000.

                      Interagency Law Enforcement


                 Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement

       For necessary expenses for the detection, investigation, 
     and prosecution of individuals involved in organized crime 
     drug trafficking not otherwise provided for, to include 
     inter-governmental agreements with State and local law 
     enforcement agencies engaged in the investigation and 
     prosecution of individuals involved in organized crime drug 
     trafficking, $340,189,000, of which $50,000,000 shall remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That any amounts 
     obligated from appropriations under this heading may be used 
     under authorities available to the organizations reimbursed 
     from this appropriation: Provided further, That any 
     unobligated balances remaining available at the end of the 
     fiscal year shall revert to the Attorney General for 
     reallocation among participating organizations in succeeding 
     fiscal years, subject to the reprogramming procedures set 
     forth in section 605 of this Act.

                    Federal Bureau of Investigation


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation for detection, investigation, and prosecution 
     of crimes against the United States; including purchase for 
     police-type use of not to exceed 1,236 passenger motor 
     vehicles, of which 1,142 will be for replacement only, 
     without regard to the general purchase price limitation for 
     the current fiscal year, and hire of passenger motor 
     vehicles; acquisition, lease, maintenance, and operation of 
     aircraft; and not to exceed $70,000 to meet unforeseen 
     emergencies of a confidential character, to be expended under 
     the direction of, and to be accounted for solely under the 
     certificate of, the Attorney General, $3,491,073,000; of 
     which not to exceed $50,000,000 for automated data processing 
     and telecommunications and technical investigative equipment 
     and not to exceed $1,000,000 for undercover operations shall 
     remain available until September 30, 2003; of which not less 
     than $448,467,000 shall be for counterterrorism 
     investigations, foreign counterintelligence, and other 
     activities related to our national security; of which not to 
     exceed $10,000,000 is authorized to be made available for 
     making advances for expenses arising out of contractual or 
     reimbursable agreements with State and local law enforcement 
     agencies while engaged in cooperative activities related to 
     violent crime, terrorism, organized crime, and drug 
     investigations: Provided, That not to exceed $45,000 shall be 
     available for official reception and representation expenses: 
     Provided further, That, in addition to reimbursable full-time 
     equivalent workyears available to the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation, not to exceed 24,935 positions and 24,488 
     full-time equivalent workyears shall be supported from the 
     funds appropriated in this Act for the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation.


                              Construction

       For necessary expenses to construct or acquire buildings 
     and sites by purchase, or as otherwise authorized by law 
     (including equipment for such buildings); conversion and 
     extension of Federally-owned buildings; and preliminary 
     planning and design of projects; $1,250,000, to remain 
     available until expended.

                    Drug Enforcement Administration


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Drug Enforcement 
     Administration, including not to exceed $70,000 to meet 
     unforeseen emergencies of a confidential character, to be 
     expended under the direction of, and to be accounted for 
     solely under the certificate of, the Attorney General; 
     expenses for conducting drug education and training programs, 
     including travel and related expenses for participants in 
     such programs and the distribution of items of token value 
     that promote the goals of such programs; purchase of not to 
     exceed 1,358 passenger motor vehicles, of which 1,079 will be 
     for replacement only, for police-type use without regard to 
     the general purchase price limitation for the current fiscal 
     year; and acquisition, lease, maintenance, and operation of 
     aircraft, $1,476,083,000; of which not to exceed $1,800,000 
     for research shall remain available until expended, and of 
     which not to exceed $4,000,000 for purchase of evidence and 
     payments for information, not to exceed $10,000,000 for 
     contracting for automated data processing and 
     telecommunications equipment, and not to exceed $2,000,000 
     for laboratory equipment, $4,000,000 for technical equipment, 
     and $2,000,000 for aircraft replacement retrofit and parts, 
     shall remain available until September 30, 2003; of which not 
     to exceed $50,000 shall be available for official reception 
     and representation expenses: Provided, That, in addition to 
     reimbursable full-time equivalent workyears available to the 
     Drug Enforcement Administration, not to exceed 7,654 
     positions and 7,515 full-time equivalent workyears shall be 
     supported from the funds appropriated in this Act for the 
     Drug Enforcement Administration.

                 Immigration and Naturalization Service


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For expenses necessary for the administration and 
     enforcement of the laws relating to immigration, 
     naturalization, and alien registration, as follows:

                     enforcement and border affairs

       For salaries and expenses for the Border Patrol program, 
     the detention and deportation program, the intelligence 
     program, the investigations program, and the inspections 
     program, including not to exceed $50,000 to meet unforeseen 
     emergencies of a confidential character, to be expended under 
     the direction of, and to be accounted for solely under the 
     certificate of, the Attorney General; purchase for police-
     type use (not to exceed 3,165 passenger motor vehicles, of 
     which 2,211 are for replacement only), without regard to the 
     general purchase price limitation for the current fiscal 
     year, and hire of passenger motor vehicles; acquisition, 
     lease, maintenance and operation of aircraft; research 
     related to immigration enforcement; for protecting and 
     maintaining the integrity of the borders of the United States 
     including, without limitation, equipping, maintaining, and 
     making improvements to the infrastructure; and for the care 
     and housing of Federal detainees held in the joint 
     Immigration and Naturalization Service and United States 
     Marshals Service Buffalo Detention Facility, $2,738,517,000; 
     of which not to exceed $5,000,000 is for payments or advances 
     arising out of contractual or reimbursable agreements with 
     State and local law enforcement agencies while engaged in 
     cooperative activities related to immigration; of which not 
     to exceed $5,000,000 is to fund or reimburse other Federal 
     agencies for the costs associated with the care, maintenance, 
     and repatriation of smuggled illegal aliens: Provided, That 
     none of the funds available to the Immigration and 
     Naturalization Service shall be available to pay any employee 
     overtime pay in an amount in excess of $30,000 during the 
     calendar year beginning January 1, 2002: Provided further, 
     That uniforms may be purchased without regard to the general 
     purchase price limitation for the current fiscal year: 
     Provided further, That, in addition to reimbursable full-time 
     equivalent workyears available to the Immigration and 
     Naturalization Service, not to exceed 20,465 positions and 
     20,066 full-time equivalent workyears shall be supported from 
     the funds appropriated under this heading in this Act for the 
     Immigration and Naturalization Service: Provided further, 
     That none of the funds provided in this or any other Act 
     shall be used for the continued operation of the San Clemente 
     and Temecula checkpoints unless the checkpoints are open and 
     traffic is being checked on a continuous 24-hour basis.

  citizenship and benefits, immigration support and program direction

       For all programs of the Immigration and Naturalization 
     Service not included under the heading ``Enforcement and 
     Border Affairs'', $632,923,000, of which not to exceed 
     $400,000 for research shall remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That not to exceed $5,000 shall be available for 
     official reception and representation expenses: Provided 
     further, That the Attorney General may transfer any funds 
     appropriated under this heading and the heading ``Enforcement 
     and Border Affairs'' between said appropriations 
     notwithstanding any percentage transfer limitations imposed 
     under this appropriations Act and may direct such fees as are 
     collected by the Immigration and Naturalization Service to 
     the activities funded under this heading and the heading 
     ``Enforcement and Border Affairs'' for performance of the 
     functions for which the fees legally may be expended: 
     Provided further, That not to exceed 40 permanent positions 
     and 40 full-time equivalent workyears and $4,300,000 shall be 
     expended for the Offices of Legislative Affairs and Public 
     Affairs: Provided further, That the latter two aforementioned 
     offices shall not be augmented by personnel details, 
     temporary transfers of personnel on either a reimbursable or 
     non-reimbursable basis, or any other type of formal or 
     informal transfer or reimbursement of personnel or funds on 
     either a temporary or long-term basis: Provided further, That 
     the number of positions filled through non-career appointment 
     at the Immigration and Naturalization Service, for which 
     funding is provided in this Act or is otherwise made 
     available to the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 
     shall not exceed four permanent positions and four

[[Page 13531]]

     full-time equivalent workyears: Provided further, That none 
     of the funds available to the Immigration and Naturalization 
     Service shall be used to pay any employee overtime pay in an 
     amount in excess of $30,000 during the calendar year 
     beginning January 1, 2002: Provided further, That funds may 
     be used, without limitation, for equipping, maintaining, and 
     making improvements to the infrastructure and the purchase of 
     vehicles for police-type use within the limits of the 
     Enforcement and Border Affairs appropriation: Provided 
     further, That, in addition to reimbursable full-time 
     equivalent workyears available to the Immigration and 
     Naturalization Service, not to exceed 3,146 positions and 
     3,523 full-time equivalent workyears shall be supported from 
     the funds appropriated under this heading in this Act for the 
     Immigration and Naturalization Service: Provided further, 
     That, notwithstanding any other provision of law, during 
     fiscal year 2002, the Attorney General is authorized and 
     directed to impose disciplinary action, including termination 
     of employment, pursuant to policies and procedures applicable 
     to employees of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, for any 
     employee of the Immigration and Naturalization Service who 
     violates policies and procedures set forth by the Department 
     of Justice relative to the granting of citizenship or who 
     willfully deceives the Congress or department leadership on 
     any matter.


                              Construction

       For planning, construction, renovation, equipping, and 
     maintenance of buildings and facilities necessary for the 
     administration and enforcement of the laws relating to 
     immigration, naturalization, and alien registration, not 
     otherwise provided for, $128,454,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That no funds shall be available 
     for the site acquisition, design, or construction of any 
     Border Patrol checkpoint in the Tucson sector.

                         Federal Prison System


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For expenses necessary for the administration, operation, 
     and maintenance of Federal penal and correctional 
     institutions, including purchase (not to exceed 685, of which 
     610 are for replacement only) and hire of law enforcement and 
     passenger motor vehicles, and for the provision of technical 
     assistance and advice on corrections related issues to 
     foreign governments, $3,830,971,000: Provided, That the 
     Attorney General may transfer to the Health Resources and 
     Services Administration such amounts as may be necessary for 
     direct expenditures by that Administration for medical relief 
     for inmates of Federal penal and correctional institutions: 
     Provided further, That the Director of the Federal Prison 
     System (FPS), where necessary, may enter into contracts with 
     a fiscal agent/fiscal intermediary claims processor to 
     determine the amounts payable to persons who, on behalf of 
     FPS, furnish health services to individuals committed to the 
     custody of FPS: Provided further, That not to exceed $6,000 
     shall be available for official reception and representation 
     expenses: Provided further, That not to exceed $50,000,000 
     shall remain available for necessary operations until 
     September 30, 2003: Provided further, That, of the amounts 
     provided for Contract Confinement, not to exceed $20,000,000 
     shall remain available until expended to make payments in 
     advance for grants, contracts and reimbursable agreements, 
     and other expenses authorized by section 501(c) of the 
     Refugee Education Assistance Act of 1980, as amended, for the 
     care and security in the United States of Cuban and Haitian 
     entrants: Provided further, That the Director of the Federal 
     Prison System may accept donated property and services 
     relating to the operation of the prison card program from a 
     not-for-profit entity which has operated such program in the 
     past notwithstanding the fact that such not-for-profit entity 
     furnishes services under contracts to the Federal Prison 
     System relating to the operation of pre-release services, 
     halfway houses or other custodial facilities.

                              {time}  1945

  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  I understand we have come to the amendment of the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Scott), and I know he is on the House floor somewhere. I 
take that back. He is on the House floor, but his amendment is not.
  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, we have had a 
discussion with the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf); and I think we 
are going to be able to work the amendment out without going through 
the process of considering it on the floor. I think we have worked 
things out. It involves a prison study. I appreciate the cooperation of 
the gentleman from Virginia.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:


                        Buildings and Facilities

       For planning, acquisition of sites and construction of new 
     facilities; purchase and acquisition of facilities and 
     remodeling, and equipping of such facilities for penal and 
     correctional use, including all necessary expenses incident 
     thereto, by contract or force account; and constructing, 
     remodeling, and equipping necessary buildings and facilities 
     at existing penal and correctional institutions, including 
     all necessary expenses incident thereto, by contract or force 
     account, $813,552,000, to remain available until expended, of 
     which not to exceed $14,000,000 shall be available to 
     construct areas for inmate work programs: Provided, That 
     labor of United States prisoners may be used for work 
     performed under this appropriation: Provided further, That 
     not to exceed 10 percent of the funds appropriated to 
     ``Buildings and Facilities'' in this or any other Act may be 
     transferred to ``Salaries and Expenses'', Federal Prison 
     System, upon notification by the Attorney General to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
     and the Senate in compliance with provisions set forth in 
     section 605 of this Act.


                Federal Prison Industries, Incorporated

       The Federal Prison Industries, Incorporated, is hereby 
     authorized to make such expenditures, within the limits of 
     funds and borrowing authority available, and in accord with 
     the law, and to make such contracts and commitments, without 
     regard to fiscal year limitations as provided by section 9104 
     of title 31, United States Code, as may be necessary in 
     carrying out the program set forth in the budget for the 
     current fiscal year for such corporation, including purchase 
     (not to exceed five for replacement only) and hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles.


   Limitation on Administrative Expenses, Federal Prison Industries, 
                              Incorporated

       Not to exceed $3,429,000 of the funds of the corporation 
     shall be available for its administrative expenses, and for 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, to be computed on an 
     accrual basis to be determined in accordance with the 
     corporation's current prescribed accounting system, and such 
     amounts shall be exclusive of depreciation, payment of 
     claims, and expenditures which the said accounting system 
     requires to be capitalized or charged to cost of commodities 
     acquired or produced, including selling and shipping 
     expenses, and expenses in connection with acquisition, 
     construction, operation, maintenance, improvement, 
     protection, or disposition of facilities and other property 
     belonging to the corporation or in which it has an interest.

                       Office of Justice Programs


                           Justice Assistance

       For grants, contracts, cooperative agreements, and other 
     assistance authorized by title I of the Omnibus Crime Control 
     and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended (``the 1968 Act''), 
     and the Missing Children's Assistance Act, as amended, 
     including salaries and expenses in connection therewith, and 
     with the Victims of Crime Act of 1984, as amended, 
     $187,877,000, to remain available until expended, as 
     authorized by section 1001 of title I of the Omnibus Crime 
     Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended by Public 
     Law 102-534 (106 Stat. 3524).
       In addition, for grants, cooperative agreements, and other 
     assistance authorized by sections 819 and 821 of the 
     Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 and for 
     other counterterrorism programs, $220,494,000, to remain 
     available until expended.


               State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance

       For assistance authorized by the Violent Crime Control and 
     Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-322), as amended 
     (``the 1994 Act''); the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe 
     Streets Act of 1968, as amended (``the 1968 Act''); the 
     Victims of Child Abuse Act of 1990, as amended (``the 1990 
     Act''); and the Victims of Trafficking and Violence 
     Protection Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-386); $2,519,575,000 
     (including amounts for administrative costs, which shall be 
     transferred to and merged with the ``Justice Assistance'' 
     account), to remain available until expended as follows:
       (1) $521,849,000 for Local Law Enforcement Block Grants, 
     pursuant to H.R. 728 as passed by the House of 
     Representatives on February 14, 1995, except that for 
     purposes of this Act, Guam shall be considered a ``State'', 
     the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico shall be considered a ``unit 
     of local government'' as well as a ``State'', for the 
     purposes set forth in subparagraphs (A), (B), (D), (F), and 
     (I) of section 101(a)(2) of H.R. 728, and for establishing 
     crime prevention programs involving cooperation between 
     community residents and law enforcement personnel in order to 
     control, detect, or investigate crime or the prosecution of 
     criminals: Provided, That no funds provided under this 
     heading may be used as matching funds for any other Federal 
     grant program, of which:
       (A) $60,000,000 shall be for Boys and Girls Clubs in public 
     housing facilities and other areas in cooperation with State 
     and local law enforcement: Provided, That funds may also be 
     used to defray the costs of indemnification insurance for law 
     enforcement officers,
       (B) $6,000,000 shall be for the National Police Athletic 
     League pursuant to Public Law 106-367, and

[[Page 13532]]

       (C) $19,956,000 shall be available for grants, contracts, 
     and other assistance to carry out section 102(c) of H.R. 728;
       (2) $565,000,000 for the State Criminal Alien Assistance 
     Program, as authorized by section 242(j) of the Immigration 
     and Nationality Act, as amended;
       (3) $35,000,000 for the Cooperative Agreement Program;
       (4) $48,162,000 for assistance to Indian tribes, of which:
       (A) $35,191,000 shall be available for grants under section 
     20109(a)(2) of subtitle A of title II of the 1994 Act,
       (B) $7,982,000 shall be available for the Tribal Courts 
     Initiative, and
       (C) $4,989,000 shall be available for demonstration grants 
     on alcohol and crime in Indian Country;
       (5) $570,000,000 for programs authorized by part E of title 
     I of the 1968 Act, notwithstanding the provisions of section 
     511 of said Act, of which $70,000,000 shall be for 
     discretionary grants under the Edward Byrne Memorial State 
     and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Programs;
       (6) $11,975,000 for the Court Appointed Special Advocate 
     Program, as authorized by section 218 of the 1990 Act;
       (7) $2,296,000 for Child Abuse Training Programs for 
     Judicial Personnel and Practitioners, as authorized by 
     section 224 of the 1990 Act;
       (8) $998,000 for grants for televised testimony, as 
     authorized by section 1001(a)(7) of the 1968 Act;
       (9) $184,537,000 for Grants to Combat Violence Against 
     Women, to States, units of local government, and Indian 
     tribal governments, as authorized by section 1001(a)(18) of 
     the 1968 Act, of which:
       (A) $1,000,000 shall be for the Bureau of Justice 
     Statistics for grants, contracts, and other assistance for a 
     domestic violence Federal case processing study,
       (B) $5,200,000 shall be for the National Institute of 
     Justice for grants, contracts, and other assistance for 
     research and evaluation of violence against women,
       (C) $10,000,000 shall be for the Office of Juvenile Justice 
     and Delinquency Prevention for the Safe Start Program, to be 
     administered as authorized by part C of the Juvenile Justice 
     and Delinquency Act of 1974, as amended, and
       (D) $5,000,000 shall be for the National Institute of 
     Justice for grants, contracts, and other assistance for 
     research on family violence;
       (10) $64,925,000 for Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies to 
     States, units of local government, and Indian tribal 
     governments, as authorized by section 1001(a)(19) of the 1968 
     Act;
       (11) $39,945,000 for Rural Domestic Violence and Child 
     Abuse Enforcement Assistance Grants, as authorized by section 
     40295 of the 1994 Act;
       (12) $4,989,000 for training programs to assist probation 
     and parole officers who work with released sex offenders, as 
     authorized by section 40152(c) of the 1994 Act, and for local 
     demonstration projects;
       (13) $3,000,000 for grants to States and units of local 
     government to improve the process for entering data regarding 
     stalking and domestic violence into local, State, and 
     national crime information databases, as authorized by 
     section 40602 of the 1994 Act;
       (14) $10,000,000 for grants to reduce Violent Crimes 
     Against Women on Campus, as authorized by section 1108(a) of 
     Public Law 106-386;
       (15) $40,000,000 for Legal Assistance for Victims, as 
     authorized by section 1201 of Public Law 106-386;
       (16) $5,000,000 for enhancing protection for older and 
     disabled women from domestic violence and sexual assault as 
     authorized by section 40801 of the 1994 Act;
       (17) $15,000,000 for the Safe Havens for Children Pilot 
     Program as authorized by section 1301 of Public Law 106-386;
       (18) $200,000 for a report of effects of parental 
     kidnapping laws in domestic violence cases, as authorized by 
     section 1303 of Public Law 106-386;
       (19) $200,000 for the study of standards and processes for 
     forensic exams of domestic violence, as authorized by section 
     1405 of Public Law 106-386;
       (20) $7,500,000 for Education and Training to end violence 
     against and abuse of women with disabilities, as authorized 
     by section 1402 of P.L. 106-386;
       (21) $10,000,000 for victim services programs for victims 
     of trafficking, as authorized by section 107(b)(2) of Public 
     Law 106-386;
       (22) $73,861,000 for grants for residential substance abuse 
     treatment for State prisoners, as authorized by section 
     1001(a)(17) of the 1968 Act: Provided, That States that have 
     in-prison drug treatment programs, in compliance with Federal 
     requirements, may use their residential substance abuse grant 
     funds for treatment, both during incarceration and after 
     release;
       (23) $898,000 for the Missing Alzheimer's Disease Patient 
     Alert Program, as authorized by section 240001(c) of the 1994 
     Act;
       (24) $50,000,000 for Drug Courts, as authorized by title V 
     of the 1994 Act;
       (25) $1,497,000 for Law Enforcement Family Support 
     Programs, as authorized by section 1001(a)(21) of the 1968 
     Act;
       (26) $1,995,000 for public awareness programs addressing 
     marketing scams aimed at senior citizens, as authorized by 
     section 250005(3) of the 1994 Act;
       (27) $249,450,000 for Juvenile Accountability Incentive 
     Block Grants, of which $38,000,000 shall be available for 
     grants, contracts, and other assistance under the Project 
     ChildSafe Initiative, except that such funds shall be subject 
     to the same terms and conditions as set forth in the 
     provisions under this heading for this program in Public Law 
     105-119, but all references in such provisions to 1998 shall 
     be deemed to refer instead to 2002, and Guam shall be 
     considered a ``State'' for the purposes of title III of H.R. 
     3, as passed by the House of Representatives on May 8, 1997; 
     and
       (28) $1,298,000 for Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention 
     Programs, as authorized by section 220002(h) of the 1994 Act:

     Provided, That funds made available in fiscal year 2002 under 
     subpart 1 of part E of title I of the 1968 Act may be 
     obligated for programs to assist States in the litigation 
     processing of death penalty Federal habeas corpus petitions 
     and for drug testing initiatives: Provided further, That, if 
     a unit of local government uses any of the funds made 
     available under this title to increase the number of law 
     enforcement officers, the unit of local government will 
     achieve a net gain in the number of law enforcement officers 
     who perform nonadministrative public safety service.


                       Weed and Seed Program Fund

       For necessary expenses, including salaries and related 
     expenses of the Executive Office for Weed and Seed, to 
     implement ``Weed and Seed'' program activities, $58,925,000, 
     to remain available until expended, for inter-governmental 
     agreements, including grants, cooperative agreements, and 
     contracts, with State and local law enforcement agencies, 
     non-profit organizations, and agencies of local government 
     engaged in the investigation and prosecution of violent 
     crimes and drug offenses in ``Weed and Seed'' designated 
     communities, and for either reimbursements or transfers to 
     appropriation accounts of the Department of Justice and other 
     Federal agencies which shall be specified by the Attorney 
     General to execute the ``Weed and Seed'' program strategy: 
     Provided, That funds designated by Congress through language 
     for other Department of Justice appropriation accounts for 
     ``Weed and Seed'' program activities shall be managed and 
     executed by the Attorney General through the Executive Office 
     for Weed and Seed: Provided further, That the Attorney 
     General may direct the use of other Department of Justice 
     funds and personnel in support of ``Weed and Seed'' program 
     activities only after the Attorney General notifies the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
     and the Senate in accordance with section 605 of this Act.


                  Community Oriented Policing Services

       For activities authorized by the Violent Crime Control and 
     Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Public Law 103-322 (``the 1994 
     Act'') (including administrative costs), $1,013,498,000, to 
     remain available until expended: Provided, That no funds that 
     become available as a result of deobligations from prior year 
     balances, excluding those for program management and 
     administration, may be obligated except in accordance with 
     section 605 of this Act: Provided further, That section 1703 
     (b) and (c) of the 1968 Act shall not apply to non-hiring 
     grants made pursuant to part Q of title I thereof (42 U.S.C. 
     3796dd et seq.): Provided further, That all prior year 
     balances derived from the Violent Crime Trust Fund for 
     Community Oriented Policing Services may be transferred into 
     this appropriation.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Lucas of Oklahoma

  Mr. LUCAS of Oklahoma. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Lucas of Oklahoma:
       Page 33, line 18, insert after the dollar amount the 
     following: ``(increased by $11,700,000)''.
       Page 34, line 7, insert after the first dollar amount the 
     following: ``(increased by $11,700,000)''.
       Page 34, line 16, insert after the dollar amount the 
     following: ``(increased by $11,700,000)''.
       Page 81, line 24, insert after the dollar amount the 
     following: ``(reduced by $11,700,000)''.

  Mr. LUCAS of Oklahoma. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer the following 
amendment to increase the funding for the methamphetamine enforcement 
and cleanup under the COPS program by $11.7 million. This increase is 
equal to the amount requested earlier this year by the Congressional 
Caucus to Fight and Control Methamphetamines, of which I am a member.
  Mr. Chairman, meth is arguably the fastest growing drug threat in 
America today, with my home State of Oklahoma ranking number one, 
unbelievable as it may be, per capita in the Nation in the number of 
meth lab seizures. Over the past 7 years, the number of Oklahoma meth 
lab seizures has increased by an unbelievable 8,000 percent. With an 
average cleanup cost per

[[Page 13533]]

lab of $3,500, that equals a substantial financial strain on Oklahoma 
as well as the Nation.
  Since 1994, DEA seizures of meth labs have increased more than 
sixfold nationwide. We are halfway through the year, and already there 
have been more DEA and State and local meth lab cleanups than in the 
entirety of the last year.
  Mr. Chairman, an increase in funding is vital for State and local 
enforcement programs in their struggle to combat meth production and 
distribution and to remove and dispose of hazardous materials at meth 
labs.
  I urge Members' support for our amendment and their help in our fight 
against this extremely destructive and addictive synthetic drug.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the 
gentleman's amendment.
  This amendment would take $11 million from the Broadcasting Board of 
Governors, International Broadcasting Operations account. A reduction 
of this magnitude would trigger a significant reduction-in-force 
affecting up to 100 employees; it would silence the Voice of America in 
at least a dozen foreign language services around the globe; and it 
would force reductions of worldwide broadcast hours.
  In fact, it goes just the opposite. We are trying to broadcast in the 
Sudan where there is slavery, terrorism, and this would take us back 
the other way.
  The amendment would also eliminate funding for a new program 
initiative already under way to improve and expand broadcasting to the 
Middle East and Sudan in Arabic. This new program is designed to give 
the U.S. a voice in a very, very critical area.
  U.S. broadcasting to the region is now ineffective, and the U.S. is 
not playing a role to counterbalance hate radio that is prevalent in 
the Middle East. This amendment would prevent this revamping of current 
programming and transmission strategies from moving forward.
  The amendment would cause a rollback of efforts to fight jamming of 
U.S. broadcasts by governments such as China. When I was in Tibet, 
everyone I spoke to in Tibet listened to Radio Free China. Also, 
Vietnam that denies their citizens access to information. This jamming 
cuts off what for many is the only available source of objective news 
and information.
  These offsets that the gentleman has chosen are simply unacceptable 
and would pretty much wipe out what the committee did. I strongly urge 
the rejection of the amendment.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  There is a way that the gentleman could get a lot of support on this 
side for his amendment; and that is, if he directs the cut to 
broadcasting to Cuba. So my question to him is, would he be willing to 
take the full amount out of broadcasting to Cuba?
  Mr. LUCAS of Oklahoma. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SERRANO. I yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma.
  Mr. LUCAS of Oklahoma. Mr. Chairman, I am not sure at this particular 
time that I am in a position necessarily to agree to that. I would say 
this, though, in regards to both the outstanding chairman and the 
ranking member, that looking at this budget, clearly there is a $32 
million increase for International Broadcasting Operations. I 
acknowledge that there is 7.8 percent increase in this particular fund 
and that my reduction would lower that increase to 5 percent. But the 
bottom line remains to me, we have a huge methamphetamine problem that 
is consuming our society here at home. I think we have an obligation to 
try and respond to that. I wish I could respond favorably to the 
gentleman, but I cannot.
  Mr. SERRANO. Reclaiming my time, I guess that by that statement that 
is a ``no,'' but I just want to make sure before I sit down that I made 
it clear to him that he had a great opportunity to pick up a lot of 
support on this side if he directs that fine amendment to a cut in Cuba 
broadcasting. If he did that, I would support him and he would be 
surprised how many Members on this side would support him. But I guess 
the answer is no, so in general terms, we would oppose cutting 
broadcasting because it would hurt areas of the world that need the 
support.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. LUCAS of Oklahoma. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas) 
will be postponed.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, earlier I had promised the gentleman from 
Utah (Mr. Cannon) that his amendment could be in order and be offered 
and he was not here. I know there is at least one Member on the other 
side.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Utah 
(Mr. Cannon) be permitted to go back and offer his amendment and that 
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) be permitted to do the same.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Virginia?
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, 
and I am not going to object, but I make this reservation in order to 
have just a minute to say that we will agree to this, but Members have 
an obligation to be here as the bill is being presented if they have an 
amendment. We will agree to it on this particular unanimous consent 
request. We will not agree to it for any further UCs to go back to 
anyplace in the bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Virginia?
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, I do so only 
to emphasize my total agreement with the comment of the gentleman from 
Florida. We will in this instance agree to go back because there is one 
Member from each party who would otherwise not be able to offer their 
amendments. But I think Members need to understand it is hard enough 
for the committee to manage a bill. We try our level best to 
accommodate Members. And we try to help them shape their amendments if 
they need help, but Members need to be here when those amendments come 
up in the regular bill. If they are not here, the committee cannot be 
expected to jump through hoops in the future.

                              {time}  2000

  So I think Members need to understand from here on out on this bill, 
if you want to offer an amendment, you have to be here at that point in 
the bill when the amendment is eligible; or else they will not be 
eligible for offering. We are trying to help Members get out at a 
reasonable time tonight and make certain that Members' amendments are 
going to be dealt with tomorrow, but we need the cooperation of 
Members.
  So, again, I want to repeat what was said earlier. I also would urge 
any Member who is talking about filing an amendment to get that 
amendment filed in the Record tonight so that we know what universe of 
amendments we are going to be dealing with tomorrow, because the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Serrano) are going to have a lot of things to do tomorrow, and they 
will have an opportunity to put together some kind of an agreement in 
the morning. But we need to know which amendments Members are going to 
offer. So if they are going to offer amendments, they need to get them 
filed in the Record tonight to facilitate the committee business.
  Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Wolf) that the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Cannon) and the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) be permitted to have their 
amendments considered out of order?
  There was no objection.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Cannon

  Mr. CANNON. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:


[[Page 13534]]

       Amendment offered by Mr. Cannon:
       On page 12, line 21, strike ``as in effect on June 1, 
     2000''.

  Mr. CANNON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to first thank the gentleman 
from Florida (Chairman Young), the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman 
Wolf), and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the ranking member, 
for their condescension in this matter.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment would simply eliminate a distinction in 
classes of people that Congress has already decided should be 
considered as one class. We recognize that there is not enough money 
available for the whole trust fund or to fund all of the claims under 
the Radiation Exposure and Compensation Act, and I would just like to 
maintain a group, instead of making a distinction between groups.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, we accept the amendment. We sympathize with the 
gentleman's concerns regarding individuals not receiving their 
compensation payments. The bill includes $10,766,000 to make payments 
to individuals who qualify for compensation under the original 
Radiation Exposure Act.
  The gentleman has a very, very good point. This program has now 
become in effect an entitlement program, with little or no 
discretionary funds available to pay for it. Both the administration 
and the budget resolution propose to convert this to a mandatory 
activity.
  I strongly support this proposal. I think the gentleman has a very 
good point. I read the article in the newspaper the other day about the 
elderly lady in Maryland whose husband died of radiation. Most of these 
people are getting very old, so I think it is important to provide it 
so everyone can be involved.
  Mr. CANNON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from Utah.
  Mr. CANNON. Mr. Chairman, I have in fact introduced a bill in the 
House that would make this a mandatory expenditure instead of 
discretionary. My colleague from Utah in the other body has also 
introduced a bill. I suspect that the likelihood that this will pass 
this Congress is very high, and that I think it would eliminate the 
concern and the problem we have here.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Cannon).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Hinchey

  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Hinchey:
       In title I, in the item relating to ``Federal Prison 
     System--buildings and facilities'', after the aggregate 
     dollar amount, insert the following: ``(reduced by 
     $73,000,000)''.

       In title II, in the item relating to ``Economic Development 
     Administration--economic development assistance programs'', 
     after the aggregate dollar amount, insert the following: 
     ``(increased by $73,000,000)''.

  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would increase funding for 
the Economic Development Administration by $73 million. This would 
simply level-fund EDA at what it had last year.
  Since 1965, the EDA has been helping communities build their 
infrastructure, develop their business base, rebuild their economies in 
the wake of natural disasters, plant closings and military base 
realignments, and also address persistent unemployment and 
underemployment problems.
  Over the years, EDA has invested more than $16 billion all across the 
country. It has been a good investment, generating almost three times 
as much supporting private investment. EDA public works programs help 
fund locally developed infrastructure projects that are critical to 
attracting private sector businesses to local communities. Every dollar 
of EDA public works money generates an additional $10 in private 
investment results. It is clear, I think, that in each and every one of 
our districts, we have seen the effects of EDA.
  We offset this $73 million by decreasing the prison construction 
account by a like amount, $73 million. The bill provides $813.5 million 
for prison construction. With this reduction, there is still more than 
$740 million left in this account to build new Federal prisons.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Pascrell).
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from New 
York for introducing this amendment to increase funding for EDA.
  A program close to my heart within EDA, and I know the gentleman from 
Virginia would appreciate this, is the Trade Adjustment Assistance for 
Firms program administered by the Department of Commerce. This program 
has been incredibly successful in the State of New Jersey.
  We need this help in the Garden State. It has not seen many benefits 
from the unfair trade agreements, such as NAFTA. John Walsh has done a 
tremendous job in New Jersey with the little resources that he has. 
This bill merely provides TAA level funding which is wholly 
unacceptable at this point.
  The response for TAA is overwhelming, Mr. Chairman. The 
implementation of NAFTA and the globalization we see under WTO has only 
highlighted the demands for firms for this assistance. In New Jersey 
last year, 4,000 jobs were retained or created with the help of the 
TAA. This is critical.
  It is interesting that in this country, many times the only way we 
can get health care is if you go to prison. What we are saying to the 
displaced workers in this globalization of trade, and the gentleman 
from Virginia knows this is quite true, these people have no place to 
go. We need this money best spent for our own workers.
  That is not to say that Federal prisons do not need to be built; but 
we need to take care of our own workers first that are being displaced 
by the trade agreements, the plethora of trade agreements that we see 
before us.
  We know that this is an unfair trade agreement that is to be before 
us in a few weeks. It destroys firms. It sends jobs overseas. I have 
witnessed that in my own district. By saving companies in peril, the 
TAA has created and saved jobs in communities around this country.
  There is nothing worse, Mr. Chairman, than the displaced worker who 
has been displaced by a job overseas that he should have had retained. 
TAA has averted the need for millions of dollars in unemployment 
compensation, Dislocated Workers' Compensation, welfare cash 
assistance, food stamps and other programs. This is money within the 
economy itself.
  The entire New Jersey delegation contacted this subcommittee in a 
bipartisan manner to support increased funding for the TAA to a level 
of no less than $24 million. This amendment will help us come close to 
adequately addressing the needs of American manufacturers and our 
changing global economy.
  I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey); I thank the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf); and I thank the chairman, for our 
workers need no less.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in very strong opposition to this 
amendment. A reduction in funding for the buildings and facilities 
program will delay construction of seven partially funded projects.
  One should go to a prison and see the conditions in the prison. One 
of the biggest problems in prison is prison rape, where the men are 
double and tripled bunked and have no place to go.
  The Bureau of Prisons is currently operating at 33 percent above the 
rate of capacity, system-wide. Crowding at medium-security facilities 
is 58 percent above the rate of capacity, and 48 percent at high-
security penitentiaries.
  While the gentleman has some merit to the concept of what he wants to 
do, he should not take money from the prisons. You cannot put a man or 
woman in prison for 15 years with terrible conditions and no 
rehabilitation and expect them to come out and be decent citizens. 
Higher levels of crowding

[[Page 13535]]

potentially endanger staff, inmates, and the community. In fact, as you 
can almost say, to do this could bring about riots in the prisons.
  Further, the Bureau of Prisons is experiencing its third consecutive 
year of record population growth in fiscal year 2000, of over 11,400 
inmates; and all indications are that it will continue to grow. The 
projections are inmate population will increase by 36 percent by the 
fiscal year 2008.
  Infrastructure at existing Bureau of Prisons facilities is severely 
taxed by over-utilization, which causes maintenance problems, premature 
deterioration of physical plants. Of the Bureau of Prisons' 98 
facilities, a third are over 50 years old and over half are over 20 
years old. These facilities were not designed to operate at this level.
  Finally, reducing the new construction funds means there will be no 
additional capacity for female inmates. The Bureau of Prisons female 
population is expected to increase 50 percent by the end of fiscal year 
2008, resulting in a critical shortage of bed space for female inmates. 
Since 1994, only one facility has been added to provide female 
capacity, and that was accomplished with the conversion of a male 
facility for female use.
  Delaying the secure facilities for female offenders would also 
increase the system-wide crowding levels, since male institutions 
cannot be returned to housing male offenders as planned.
  Before I got elected to Congress, I worked in a program called Man-
to-Man down at Lorton Reformatory. This amendment would be a terrible 
thing to do. Had the gentleman been able to find some other money some 
other place, we could look at it, but to take it out of the 
construction of prisons, where the conditions in the prisons are so 
miserable. In fact, I am going to be introducing a bill with a Member 
from your side with regard to asking for an investigation and study of 
prison rape. If you could see the number of men who are raped in 
prisons around this country, it would be a worldwide disgrace. We want 
people to see it so we can do something about it.
  Mr. Chairman, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this 
amendment. This would be bad, and I think it would create conditions 
that I think, frankly, would be unfortunate for the prisons.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, do we want to build bigger jails, or do we want to 
build a better economy? No one is saying on this floor that we do not 
need to build more Federal prisons. No one is saying that. But this 
administration is asking us to listen to them on the issue of trade.
  The gentleman from Virginia has spoken on this floor many times about 
displaced workers, about human rights; and I have followed the 
gentleman's point and been in support. If one listens to those who want 
to trade and open up the floodgates, because nothing is free, this 
trade is a cure that will increase employment, which will increase 
productivity and end human rights abuses. It will promote democracy, we 
hear, democracy, and do just about everything one wants. These are all 
unproved theories.
  It seems to me we could take some money from that large pool of 
building prisons. There is no debate about the need, Mr. Chairman, but 
the question is, what about our own workers? The TAA has been a 
responsible agency. The gentleman has supported it, and we have all 
supported it, to help those people who have been displaced as we have 
exported our jobs all over the world, to countries that do not respect 
us and do not respect human rights. Yet we stand here on the brink of 
another debate on trade, a few of those dollars, a few of those 
dollars, to TAA.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. PASCRELL. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, we cannot take it out of the prisons. The 
conditions there, I agree, I will be with the gentleman tomorrow or the 
next day on not granting MFN or PNTR to China, but I just do not think 
you can take it out of the prisons. The conditions in the prisons are 
so difficult and so bad.

                              {time}  2015

  So that is the problem that I have with the amendment. We just cannot 
take it out of the prisons.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, this is 10 percent. 
We are not talking about the prisoners, we are talking basically about 
construction. This bill only talks about construction.
  Retaining and creating jobs, the TAA, has generated Federal and State 
revenues, tax revenues, at a ratio of $12 for every dollar appropriated 
by this Congress. It has been a bipartisan program. We know the errors 
of NAFTA as well as the other trade agreements. To me, the American 
worker and the American working family is more important, if I have to 
make a priority. Now, when we have all priorities, we have no priority.
  All we are asking for is a few dollars in the TAA program, which the 
gentleman knows has worked and has been successful, to help the workers 
in America that have been displaced by our trade agreements.
  Mr. Chairman, our manufacturers and fabricators and dye shops all 
over America ask for our support. Will we turn our backs on them? We 
have an opportunity in this legislation with this amendment for a few 
dollars to help those dislocated workers. Otherwise, we will be into 
the empty words of the trade debate in a few weeks, and what will we 
have accomplished?
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) 
will be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:
       Of the amounts provided:
       (1) for Public Safety and Community Policing Grants 
     pursuant to title I of the 1994 Act, $470,249,000 as follows: 
     $330,000,000 for the hiring of law enforcement officers, 
     including school resource officers; $20,662,000 for training 
     and technical assistance; $25,444,000 for the matching grant 
     program for Law Enforcement Armor Vests pursuant to section 
     2501 of part Y of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets 
     Act of 1968, as amended (``the 1968 Act''); $31,315,000 to 
     improve tribal law enforcement including equipment and 
     training; $48,393,000 for policing initiatives to combat 
     methamphetamine production and trafficking and to enhance 
     policing initiatives in ``drug hot spots''; and $14,435,000 
     for Police Corps education, training, and service under 
     sections 200101-200113 of the 1994 Act;
       (2) for crime technology, $363,611,000 as follows: 
     $150,000,000 for a law enforcement technology program; 
     $35,000,000 for grants to upgrade criminal records, as 
     authorized under the Crime Identification Technology Act of 
     1998 (42 U.S.C. 14601); $40,000,000 for DNA testing as 
     authorized by the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 
     2000 (Public Law 106-546); $35,000,000 for State and local 
     DNA laboratories as authorized by section 1001(a)(22) of the 
     1968 Act, and for improvements to State and local forensic 
     laboratories' general science capacity and capability; and 
     $103,611,000 for grants, contracts and other assistance to 
     States under section 102(b) of the Crime Identification 
     Technology Act of 1998 (42 U.S.C. 14601), of which 
     $17,000,000 is for the National Institute of Justice for 
     grants, contracts, and other agreements to develop school 
     safety technologies and training;
       (3) for prosecution assistance, $99,780,000 as follows: 
     $49,780,000 for a national program to reduce gun violence, 
     and $50,000,000 for the Southwest Border Prosecutor 
     Initiative;
       (4) for grants, training, technical assistance, and other 
     expenses to support community crime prevention efforts, 
     $46,864,000 as follows: $14,967,000 for Project Sentry; 
     $14,934,000 for an offender re-entry program; and $16,963,000 
     for a police integrity program; and
       (5) not to exceed $32,994,000 for program management and 
     administration.


                       Juvenile Justice Programs

       For grants, contracts, cooperative agreements, and other 
     assistance authorized by the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 
     Prevention Act of 1974, as amended (``the Act''), including 
     salaries and expenses in connection therewith to be 
     transferred to and merged with the appropriations for Justice 
     Assistance, $278,483,000, to remain available until expended, 
     as authorized by section 299

[[Page 13536]]

     of part I of title II and section 506 of title V of the Act, 
     as amended by Public Law 102-586, of which: (1) 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, $6,832,000 shall 
     be available for expenses authorized by part A of title II of 
     the Act, $88,804,000 shall be available for expenses 
     authorized by part B of title II of the Act, and $50,139,000 
     shall be available for expenses authorized by part C of title 
     II of the Act: Provided, That $26,442,000 of the amounts 
     provided for part B of title II of the Act, as amended, is 
     for the purpose of providing additional formula grants under 
     part B to States that provide assurances to the Administrator 
     that the State has in effect (or will have in effect no later 
     than 1 year after date of application) policies and programs 
     that ensure that juveniles are subject to accountability-
     based sanctions for every act for which they are adjudicated 
     delinquent; (2) $11,974,000 shall be available for expenses 
     authorized by sections 281 and 282 of part D of title II of 
     the Act for prevention and treatment programs relating to 
     juvenile gangs; (3) $9,978,000 shall be available for 
     expenses authorized by section 285 of part E of title II of 
     the Act; (4) $15,965,000 shall be available for expenses 
     authorized by part G of title II of the Act for juvenile 
     mentoring programs; and (5) $94,791,000 shall be available 
     for expenses authorized by title V of the Act for incentive 
     grants for local delinquency prevention programs; of which 
     $12,472,000 shall be for delinquency prevention, control, and 
     system improvement programs for tribal youth; of which 
     $14,967,000 shall be available for the Safe Schools 
     Initiative including $5,033,000 for grants, contracts, and 
     other assistance under the Project Sentry Initiative; and of 
     which $37,000,000 shall be available for grants, contracts 
     and other assistance under the Project ChildSafe Initiative: 
     Provided further, That of amounts made available under the 
     Juvenile Justice Programs of the Office of Justice Programs 
     to carry out part B (relating to Federal Assistance for State 
     and Local Programs), subpart II of part C (relating to 
     Special Emphasis Prevention and Treatment Programs), part D 
     (relating to Gang-Free Schools and Communities and Community-
     Based Gang Intervention), part E (relating to State Challenge 
     Activities), and part G (relating to Mentoring) of title II 
     of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 
     1974, and to carry out the At-Risk Children's Program under 
     title V of that Act, not more than 10 percent of each such 
     amount may be used for research, evaluation, and statistics 
     activities designed to benefit the programs or activities 
     authorized under the appropriate part or title, and not more 
     than 2 percent of each such amount may be used for training 
     and technical assistance activities designed to benefit the 
     programs or activities authorized under that part or title.
       In addition, for grants, contracts, cooperative agreements, 
     and other assistance, $10,976,000 to remain available until 
     expended, for developing, testing, and demonstrating programs 
     designed to reduce drug use among juveniles.
       In addition, for grants, contracts, cooperative agreements, 
     and other assistance authorized by the Victims of Child Abuse 
     Act of 1990, as amended, $8,481,000, to remain available 
     until expended, as authorized by section 214B of the Act.


                    Public Safety Officers Benefits

       To remain available until expended, for payments authorized 
     by part L of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe 
     Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796), as amended, such sums 
     as are necessary, as authorized by section 6093 of Public Law 
     100-690 (102 Stat. 4339-4340); and $2,395,000, to remain 
     available until expended for payments as authorized by 
     section 1201(b) of said Act.

               General Provisions--Department of Justice

       Sec. 101. In addition to amounts otherwise made available 
     in this title for official reception and representation 
     expenses, a total of not to exceed $45,000 from funds 
     appropriated to the Department of Justice in this title shall 
     be available to the Attorney General for official reception 
     and representation expenses in accordance with distributions, 
     procedures, and regulations established by the Attorney 
     General.
       Sec. 102. Authorities contained in the Department of 
     Justice Appropriation Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 1980 
     (Public Law 96-132; 93 Stat. 1040 (1979)), as amended, shall 
     remain in effect until the effective date of a subsequent 
     Department of Justice Appropriation Authorization Act.
       Sec. 103. None of the funds appropriated by this title 
     shall be available to pay for an abortion, except where the 
     life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were 
     carried to term, or in the case of rape: Provided, That 
     should this prohibition be declared unconstitutional by a 
     court of competent jurisdiction, this section shall be null 
     and void.


                   Amendment Offered by Ms. De Gette

  Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Ms. DeGette:
       Page 39, strike lines 18 through 24 (and make such 
     technical and conforming changes as may be appropriate).

  Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Chairman, the amendment I am offering here tonight 
is very straightforward. It removes the language of the bill that 
prohibits the use of Federal funds for abortion services for women in 
Federal prison.
  Unlike other American women who are denied Federal coverage of 
abortion services, most women in prison are indigent. They have little 
access to outside financial help, and they earn extremely low wages in 
prison jobs.
  They are also often incarcerated in prisons that are far away from 
their support system of family and friends and, as a result, inmates in 
the Federal Prison System are completely dependent on the Bureau of 
Prisons for all their needs, including food, shelter, clothing, and all 
on their aspects of their medical care. These women are not able to 
work at jobs that would enable them to pay for medical services, 
including abortion services, and most of them do not have the support 
of families to pay for those services.
  The overwhelming majority of women in Federal prisons work on the 
general pay scale and earn from 12 cents to 40 cents an hour, which 
equals roughly $5 to $16 a week. Let me repeat that. The average woman 
inmate in prison earns $5 to $16 per week. The average cost of an early 
outpatient abortion ranges from $200 to $400, and it goes up from 
there.
  Even if a woman in the Federal Prison System earned the maximum wage 
on the general pay scale and worked 40 hours a week, which many 
prisoners are not able to do, she would not earn enough in 12 weeks to 
pay for an abortion in the first trimester if she so chose, and, of 
course, after that, the cost and risks of an abortion go up 
dramatically.
  So, the woman in prison is caught in a vicious cycle. Even if she 
saved her entire income, every single penny, she could never afford an 
abortion on her own. Therefore, women in prison do not have any choice 
at all.
  Congress's continued denial of coverage of abortion services for 
Federal inmates has effectively shut down the only avenue these women 
have to pursue their constitutional right to choose.
  Let me remind my colleagues, for the last 28 years, women in America 
have had a constitutional right to choose abortion as a reproductive 
choice. This right does not disappear when a woman walks through the 
prison doors. The consequence of the Federal funding ban is that 
inmates who have no independent financial means, which is most of them, 
are foreclosed from their constitutional choice of an abortion in 
violation of their rights under the Constitution.
  With the absence of funding by the very institution prisoners depend 
on for the rest of their health services, many pregnant women prisoners 
are, in fact, forced to carry unwanted pregnancies to term. Motherhood 
is mandated for them.
  I think it is important to point out that the anti-choice movement in 
Congress has denied coverage for abortion services to women in the 
military, denied coverage for women who work for the government, for 
poor people, and for all women insured by the Federal Employees Health 
Benefits Plan.
  I vehemently disagree with all of these restrictions. I think they 
are wrong, and I think they are mean-spirited. But frankly, this 
restriction is the worst of all, and here is why: it targets the people 
who have the fewest resources and the least number of options. It 
effectively denies these women their fundamental right to choose. It is 
not just coercive, it is downright inhumane.
  Now, let me talk for a moment about the types of women in the Federal 
Prison System. Many are victims of physical and sexual abuse. That is 
how they got pregnant, oftentimes. Two-thirds of the women who are 
incarcerated are incarcerated for nonviolent drug offenses. Many of 
them are HIV-infected, and many of them have full-blown AIDS. Congress 
thinks that it is in our country's best interest to force motherhood on 
these women? It is simply not our place to make this decision.
  Mr. Chairman, what will happen to these children? What will happen to 
the children of mothers who have unwanted babies in prison? Frankly, I

[[Page 13537]]

think this is the worst kind of government intrusion into the most 
personal of decisions. I wholeheartedly support the right of women in 
prison to bring their pregnancy to term if they so choose. They, not 
me, not anyone here, should make that decision for them.
  I want to make it perfectly clear what this amendment is really 
about. It is about forcing some women, against their will, to bear a 
child in prison, when that child will be shortly taken away from them 
at birth, and then, to have that child raised heaven knows where. It is 
cruel and it is unfair to force them to go through this pregnancy and, 
therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote for the DeGette amendment.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentlewoman's 
amendment.
  The provision in the bill the amendment seeks to strike does only one 
thing: it prohibits Federal tax dollars from paying for abortions for 
Federal prison inmates, except in the case of rape or the life of the 
mother.
  This is a very longstanding provision, one that has been carried in 
12 of the last 13 Commerce, State, Justice, and Judiciary appropriation 
bills. The House has consistently, year after year, rejected this 
amendment. Last year, this very amendment was rejected by a vote of 254 
to 156. Time and again the Congress has debated this issue of whether 
Federal tax dollars should be used for abortion, and the answer has 
been no.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge the rejection of the gentlewoman's amendment.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the DeGette amendment. In 
recent years, a woman's access to abortion has been restricted bill by 
bill, vote by vote. The DeGette amendment seeks to correct one of these 
unjust restrictions.
  Women in Federal prisons should not be made to check all of their 
rights at the door. Women have a constitutional right to choose, which 
should not be denied even if they are incarcerated.
  Facing an unintended pregnancy is a tough situation for any woman, 
but a woman in prison is faced with very few choices. These women will 
have very limited prenatal care. Some women in prison will choose to 
carry the pregnancy to term, and I support this choice. But without the 
right to choose, their only option is to go through childbirth while 
incarcerated, and then to give their child up.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment which 
removes the ban on the use of Federal funds for abortion services for 
women in Federal prisons. These women have little or no access to 
outside financial or even family assistance and earn extremely low 
wages from prison jobs. Women in prison deserve the same choices they 
would receive for any other medical condition. We need equity in 
reproduction services.
  The ban on abortion assistance denies them of their constitutional 
rights. Women in prison must not be denied their right to choose when 
these prisons cannot guarantee a safe delivery or treatment while 
pregnant. The right to choose is meaningless without the access to 
choose.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the DeGette amendment.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the DeGette amendment.
  For women in prison, this amendment projects their constitutional 
right to reproductive services, including abortion. Without this 
amendment, women in prison are denied the right to health care benefits 
that every other woman has available to them. We are not saying women 
in prison cannot choose to have a child, we are simply saying they have 
a right to choose not to have a child.
  Once again, the anti-choice movement is targeting their efforts on 
women who have limited options. Most women in prison have few resources 
and little outside support. Denying abortion coverage to women in 
Federal prisons is just another direct assault on the right of all 
women to have reproductive choice.
  Mr. Chairman, it is time to honor the Supreme Court decision in Roe 
v. Wade and acknowledge that every woman has a right to have access to 
safe, reliable abortion services. We must stop these piecemeal attempts 
to roll back women's reproductive freedom and we must provide the 
education and the resources needed to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

                              {time}  2030

  Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues, vote for the DeGette amendment and 
protect a woman's right to reproductive choice.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite 
number of words.
  Mr. Chairman, this is not a common occurrence, but it does happen. 
When it happens, it is under tragic circumstances. For this Congress to 
prevent a woman from being able to make reasonable choices that 
influence the rest of her life is just unconscionable.
  Women do get arrested and are incarcerated while pregnant. Some women 
are impregnated by guards. For whatever reason, some women find 
themselves in untenable positions in prison. To deny them the 
constitutional rights that women fortunately have in the United States 
because they are imprisoned is wrong. For us to be the vehicle that 
denies those rights is unconscionable.
  Think of the child that is born into a situation where its mother is 
incarcerated in prison. Children need to be born into a loving, 
nurturing, wanted situation. What could be worse than to be forced to 
give birth to a child that might be the result of a rape in prison that 
would be a child that one could not care for, that one could not raise 
in the way all of us were raised?
  The woman deserves the right to choose. She should not be denied 
that. This amendment should be supported.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the DeGette 
amendment, which would strike language banning the use of Federal funds 
for abortion services for women in Federal prisons.
  Since women in prison are completely dependent on the Federal Bureau 
of Prisons for all of their health care services, the ban on the use of 
Federal funds is a cruel policy that traps women by denying them access 
to reproductive care.
  Abortion is a legal option for women in America. The ban for women in 
Federal prisons is unconstitutional because freedom of choice is a 
right that has been protected under our Constitution for more than 25 
years.
  Furthermore, the great majority of women who enter our Federal prison 
system are impoverished and often isolated from family, friends, and 
resources.
  We are dealing with very complex histories that often tragically 
include drug abuse, homelessness, HIV/AIDS and physical and sexual 
abuse.
  To deny basic reproductive choice would only make worse the crisis 
faced by the women and the Federal prison system.
  The ban on the use of Federal funds is a deliberate attack by the 
antichoice movement to ultimately derail all reproductive options.
  Limiting choice for incarcerated women puts other populations at 
great risk. This dangerous slippery slope erodes the right to choose 
little by little.
  We are denying these women the right to health care benefits that 
every other woman has readily available to them.
  Women in prison receive limited prenatal care, have limited 
resources, and must endure the fear of losing custody of their infant 
upon birth. These circumstances make it an extremely difficult 
situation for pregnant prisoners.
  It is my belief that freedom of access must be unconditionally kept 
intact.
  Therefore, I strongly urge my colleagues to protect this 
constitutional right for women in America and vote `yes' on the DeGette 
amendment.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the DeGette Amendment to 
strike the ban on abortion funding for women in federal prison. This 
ban is cruel, unnecessary, and unwarranted.
  Mr. Chairman, a woman's sentence should not include forcing her to 
carry a pregnancy to term. Most women in prison are poor, have little 
or no access to outside financial help, and earn extremely low wages 
from prison jobs. Inmates in general work 40 hours a week and

[[Page 13538]]

earn between 12 to 40 cents per hour. They totally depend on the health 
services they receive from their institutions. Most female prisoners 
are unable to finance their own abortions, and, therefore, are in 
effect denied their constitutional right to an abortion.
  Earning the maximum rate of wages, a female prisoner would need to 
work 40 hours a week for 12 and \1/2\ weeks just to be able to afford 
the lowest cost of a first trimester abortion ($200), but by that time 
she is no longer in the first trimester and, therefore, the cost of the 
abortion would be higher. So she would need to work even more to pay 
for the higher cost and more dangerous abortion. However, she will 
never make enough money in prison to pay for a timely, safe abortion 
even if she saves every penny she earns from the moment of conception. 
Why? Because the cost of later and later term abortions (from $200 to 
$700 to $1200) increases faster than her ability to earn money. So the 
legislation essentially bans abortion services for women in prison.
  Remember, many women prisoners are victims of physical or sexual 
abuse and are pregnant before entering prison. In addition, they will 
almost certainly be forced to give up their children at birth. Why 
should we add to their anguish by denying them access to reproductive 
services?
  Even worse, prison health services are inadequate for pregnant women. 
A 1999 report by Amnesty International USA revealed that gynecological 
services for women in prisons are inadequate and of poor quality. So, 
not only are we forcing women to carry pregnancies to term, but we are 
forcing them to do so in an environment where medical conditions are 
notoriously bad. We, therefore, increase the risk of late-term 
miscarriages and other potentially life threatening complications. That 
is dangerous and unnecessary.
  Furthermore, we ought to keep this debate in perspective. This ban on 
abortions does not stop thousands of abortions from taking place, 
rather it places an unconstitutional burden on a few women facing a 
difficult situation. Statistics show that there are approximately 
10,448 women in federal prison, that only 4 had abortions in FY 1998 
and only 2 had abortions in FY 1999. There were only 56 births in FY 
1998, and 24 births in FY 1999. So this is a very small group of 
people.
  I know full well that the authors of this ban would take away the 
right to choose from all American women if they could, but since they 
are prevented from doing so by the Supreme Court (and the popular will 
of the American people who overwhelmingly support choice) they have 
instead targeted their restrictions on women in prison. Women in 
prison, who are perhaps the least likely to be able to object.
  Well watch out America. After they have denied reproductive health 
services to all women in prison, all federal employees, all women in 
the armed forces, and all women on public assistance, then they will 
once again try to ban all abortions in the United States. And they 
won't stop there, we know that many anti-choice forces want to 
eliminate contraceptives as well. It is a slippery slope that denies 
the realities of today, punishes women, and threatens their health and 
safety. This radical agenda must be stopped now.
  I urge my colleagues to support the DeGette amendment.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, as an advocate for Women's 
Choice I strongly support Representative DeGette's amendment. 
Representative DeGette's amendment will strike the language in the 
Commerce Justice State Appropriations bill which would prohibit federal 
funds from being used for abortions in prison.
  Abortion is a legal health care option for American women, and has 
been for over 20 years. Because Federal prisoners are totally dependent 
on health care services provided by the Bureau of Prisons, the ban, in 
effect will prevent these women from seeking the needed reproductive 
health care that should be every women's right--the right to choose an 
abortion.
  We know that most women who enter prison are poor. Many of them are 
victims of physical and sexual abuse, and some of them are pregnant 
before entering prison. An unwanted pregnancy is a difficult issue in 
even the most supportive environs. However, limited prenatal care, 
isolation from family and friends and the certain custody loss of the 
infant upon birth present circumstances which only serve to worsen an 
already very dire situation.
  In 1993, Congress lifted the funding restrictions that since 1987 had 
prohibited the use of federal funds to provide abortion services to 
women in federal prisons except during instances of rape and life 
endangerment. Women who seek abortions in prison must receive medical 
religious and/or social counseling sessions for women seeking abortion. 
There must be written documentation of these counseling sessions, and 
any staff member who morally or religiously objects to abortion need 
not participate in the prisoner's decision making process.
  There was a 75 percent growth in the number of women in Federal 
prisons over the last decade. Currently, the growth rate for women is 
twice that of men in prison. Yet, the rate of infection for HIV and 
AIDs in women exceeds the rate of infection for men in prison, and 
pregnant women are of course at risk of passing on this disease to 
their unborn children.
  This ban on federal funds for women in prison is another direct 
assault on the right to choose. This ban is just one more step in the 
long line of rollbacks on women's reproductive freedoms. We must stop 
this assault on reproductive rights.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette) 
will be postponed.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I do so to engage in a friendly filibuster on behalf of 
the House, because what we are trying to do is to bring to the House 
floor a unanimous consent agreement so that Members will understand 
what the intention is in terms of proceeding for the rest of the 
evening.
  The staff is in the process of writing the changes to that agreement 
right now, so to prevent this from getting into another protracted 
debate on another amendment this evening, I am simply taking this time 
in the hopes that by the time I sit down, we will have the required 
paperwork so the Committee can proceed.
  I am looking around with great expectation, hoping that the staff in 
fact has the paperwork ready, but I think they have all fled to the 
cloakrooms.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBEY. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to tell the gentleman that 
as he was pondering where everything was, the paper was reaching the 
gentleman. I think he is a much happier man now.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I am happy we do not have to ask the Sergeant 
to bring in the absent staff.
  If the gentleman is ready to proceed, I am happy to yield back my 
time so that he can propound the unanimous consent request.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Reynolds) having assumed the chair, Mr. Hastings of Washington, 
Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, 
reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill 
(H.R. 2500), making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, 
Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and related agencies for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes, had come to no 
resolution thereon.

                          ____________________