[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 16]
[Senate]
[Pages 22122-22123]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. EDWARDS:
  S. 1672. A bill to prevent terrorist hoaxes and false reports; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Punishing 
Terrorist Hoaxes Act of 2001.
  In the days since September 11, all of us have learned that anthrax 
hoaxes are no joking matter. They are acts of terror in the true sense 
of the word because they inflict great fear and anxiety on innocent 
people. In addition, these hoaxes drain resources from police and 
emergency workers--resources desperately needed not only for the real 
war on terror, but for all of the ordinary emergencies that continue to 
arise every single day.
  According to recent reports, there have been some 160 anthrax and 
other terrorism hoaxes since September 11. In Connecticut, one hoax 
triggered the evacuation of 800 government employees for two days. 
Hoaxes in Virginia and Oregon have shut down post offices. In my State 
of North Carolina, from Greensboro to Chapel Hill, hoaxes have targeted 
and terrified workers at family planning medical clinics--workers who 
already must live with death threats day in and day out.
  I have spoken with law enforcement officials in North Carolina who 
believe we need new Federal legislation specifically to fight hoaxes. 
At a hearing of the Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Technology, 
Terrorism, and Government Information earlier this week, officials from 
the Bush Administration requested that legislation. In response to 
several questions that I asked, they articulated the very real need: 
Current law prohibits terrorist ``threats,'' but terrorism hoaxes may 
not always be viewed as threats because the people perpetrating the 
hoaxes are not able and do not intend to carry out actual terrorist 
acts. Yet these hoaxes must be punished.
  The legislation I propose builds on proposals by other Senators on 
both sides of the aisle, including Senator Leahy, Senators Biden and 
Hatch, and Senators Schumer and DeWine. There are two things that 
distinguish the legislation I propose, and I want to highlight those.
  First, my proposal includes ``findings'' about the need for this 
legislation. In recent decisions holding that Federal laws are not 
proper exercises of Congress's ``commerce clause'' power and therefore 
are not constitutional, the Supreme Court has said that ``findings'' 
about a real Federal need are important. Although I don't agree with 
those recent cases, I want to do everything I can to make sure this 
statute is upheld in the courts. The addition of findings is one way to 
do that while still enacting the ban we need.
  Second, my proposal establishes two Federal hoax crimes, not just 
one. All persons who perpetrate hoaxes are punishable by up to two 
years in prison. In addition, persons who perpetrate hoaxes with intent 
to cause fear, in a manner reasonably likely to cause an emergency 
response, are punishable by up to five years in prison. The line we are 
drawing is a line between people who

[[Page 22123]]

really and truly think they are ``just joking'' and people who want to 
terrorize others.
  Both kinds of hoaxes should be felony crimes. And the person who 
wants to inflict fear deserves a stiffer sentence than the person who 
does not. That is a line we regularly draw in the criminal law. We 
punish people with evil motives more than people who are reckless or 
stupid. Federal law makes that distinction in the Bomb Hoax Act, 18 
U.S.C. Sec. 35, which sets up a lesser offense requiring no criminal 
intent, and a greater offense requiring that the perpetrator act 
``maliciously.''
  I ask the Congress to enact the Punishing Terrorist Hoaxes Act of 
2001. And whether we enact this legislation or one of my colleagues' 
proposals, I ask the Congress to enact an anti-hoax bill before we go 
out of session. We owe it to police officers, public health officials, 
and the American people.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SMITH of Oregon:
  S. 1674. A bill to amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act to authorize 
the Secretary of Agriculture to issue marketing orders for cranberries; 
to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
text of the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1674

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

     SECTION 1. MARKETING ORDERS FOR CANEBERRIES.

       (a) In General.--Section 8c of the Agricultural Adjustment 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 608c), reenacted with amendments by the 
     Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (2)(A), by inserting ``caneberries 
     (including raspberries, blackberries, and loganberries),'' 
     after ``other than pears, olives, grapefruit, cherries,''; 
     and
       (2) in subsection (6)(I), by striking ``tomatoes,,'' and 
     inserting ``tomatoes, caneberries (including raspberries, 
     blackberries, and loganberries),''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 8e(a) of the 
     Agricultural Adjustment Act (7 U.S.C. 608e-l(a)), reenacted 
     with amendments by the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act 
     of 1937, is amended in the first sentence by striking ``or 
     eggplants'' and inserting ``eggplants, or caneberries 
     (including raspberries, blackberries, and loganberries)''.

                          ____________________