[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3499-3504]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. SPECTER (for himself and Mr. Durbin):
  S. 3120. A bill to encourage the entry of felony warrants into the 
National Crime Information Center database by States and provide 
additional resources for extradition; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I am now introducing the Fugitive 
Information Networked Database Act of 2010.
  On December 12 of last year, the Philadelphia Inquirer began a series 
of articles that served as a blistering indictment of the Philadelphia 
criminal justice system. The Inquirer described it as ``a system that 
too often fails to punish violent criminals, fails to protect 
witnesses, fails to catch thousands of fugitives, fails to decide cases 
on their merits, and fails to provide justice.'' The Inquirer article 3 
days later elaborated on the fugitive problem, noting that as of 
November 2009, there were almost 47,000 long-term fugitives at large.
  The warrant situation in Philadelphia is complicated by the fact that 
the Philadelphia Police Department only enters into the national 
database a few hundred bench warrants deemed by the district attorney's 
office to concern extraditable offenses. Those who

[[Page 3500]]

abscond from criminal proceedings in Philadelphia and flee to other 
States likely will not be captured because the information for their 
warrants is not automatically entered into the NCIC database.
  The legislation I am introducing today, along with Senator Durbin, 
builds on legislation previously entered by then-Senator Biden and 
Senator Durbin. The proposed legislation will provide substantial 
Federal funding to assist the States in tracking and returning these 
fugitives.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full text of my 
statement which I have just summarized and the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

 Senator Specter's Statement Upon Introducing the Fugitive Information 
              Networked Database Act of 2010, The Find Act

       Mr. President, I have sought recognition to introduce the 
     Fugitive Information Networked Database Act of 2010, the FIND 
     Act. On December 12, 2009, the Philadelphia Inquirer began a 
     series of articles that served as a blistering indictment of 
     the Philadelphia criminal justice system. The Inquirer 
     described it as ``a system that all too often fails to punish 
     violent criminals, fails to protect witnesses, fails to catch 
     thousands of fugitives, fails to decide cases on their 
     merits--fails to provide justice.'' (Craig R. McCoy, Nancy 
     Phillips, and Dylan Purcell, Justice: Delayed, Dismissed, 
     Denied, Philadelphia Inquirer, Dec. 12, 2009). Three days 
     later, on December 15, 2009, the Philadelphia Inquirer 
     elaborated on the fugitive problem noting that as of November 
     2009, ``there were 46,801 long-term fugitives--suspects 
     generally on the run for at least a year. The bulk of these 
     fugitives date from this decade and the last.'' (Dylan 
     Purcell, Craig R. McCoy, and Nancy Phillips, Violent 
     Criminals Flout Broken Bail System, Tens of Thousands of 
     Philadelphia Fugitives are on the Streets, Abetted by the 
     City's Deeply Flawed Program, Philadelphia Inquirer, Dec. 15, 
     2009). The article reported that Philadelphia ``[f]ugitives 
     now owe taxpayers a whopping $1 billion in forfeited bail, 
     according to court officials who computed the figure . . .'' 
     (Id.). Despite the obvious incentive to recapture those funds 
     in this era of budget shortfalls, the article noted, that the 
     ``Clerk of Quarter Sessions Office . . . has never kept a 
     computerized list of the debtors.''
       These problems warranted Senate hearings and in my capacity 
     as the Chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and 
     Drugs, I held a field hearing in Philadelphia titled, 
     ``Exploring Federal Solutions to the State and Local Fugitive 
     Crisis,'' on January 19, 2010. What we learned was that 
     Philadelphia's fugitive problem, though serious in scope, is 
     not just a local problem but is in fact a significant 
     national problem.
       Nationwide, there are an estimated 2.7 million active 
     Federal, State, and local outstanding felony warrants. Many 
     of these fugitives commit additional crimes. Every day large 
     numbers of fugitives evade capture because state and local 
     law enforcement authorities have insufficient resources to 
     find and arrest them. And even if found, state and local law 
     enforcement authorities often do not have the funds to pay 
     for the fugitive's extradition to face trial. Shockingly, 
     many fugitives are released without prosecution.
       The nationwide database operated by the FBI's National 
     Crime Information Center (``NCIC'') is missing over half of 
     the country's 2.7 million felony warrants, including warrants 
     for hundreds of thousands of violent crimes. Fugitives who 
     have fled to another state will not be caught--even if they 
     are stopped and questioned by the police on a routine traffic 
     stop--because their warrants have not been entered into the 
     NCIC database.
       In early 2008, the St. Louis Post Dispatch published a 
     series of articles--affirmed by the Department of Justice 
     documenting law enforcement's widespread failure to find and 
     arrest fugitives. For purposes of the series, ``fugitive'' 
     included un-arrested suspects with pending warrants that law 
     enforcement cannot find, and those who cannot be found after 
     violating the rules of their pre-trial detention, probation, 
     or parole. The articles revealed that the reach of this 
     national problem is extensive and cited federal estimates 
     from two years ago that as many as an estimated 800,000 to 
     1.6 million outstanding state or local warrants are 
     inaccessible to law enforcement outside the state or locality 
     in which they were issued because the information about the 
     warrants had not been entered into the NCIC database.
       In Philadelphia, while all warrants, including bench 
     warrants, are entered into a state database, only a small 
     fraction of these warrants is entered into the NCIC database. 
     The Philadelphia Police Department only enters into the NCIC 
     database a few hundred bench warrants deemed by the District 
     Attorney's Office to concern extraditable offenses and 
     surprisingly the Police Departments makes these entries 
     manually and not by automatic computer transfers. Thus, those 
     who abscond from criminal proceedings in Philadelphia and 
     flee to other states likely will not be captured because 
     information from their warrants is not automatically entered 
     into the NCIC database.
       Last Congress, on June 16, 2008, then-Senator Biden 
     introduced the FIND Act (S. 3136), that sought to address 
     similar problems. At the time, Senator Biden said, ``Too 
     often, State and local law enforcement agencies enter 
     warrants into the State and local databases, but not into the 
     national database.'' His statement was prescient then and is 
     still true now. By September 2008, Senator Biden had been 
     joined by Senators Clinton and Durbin as cosponsors and the 
     bill had passed the Judiciary Committee.
       Today I take up Vice President Biden's mantle and, along 
     with Senator Durbin, introduce the ``Fugitive Information 
     Networked Database Act of 2010,'' the FIND Act. This bill 
     directs the Attorney General to make a total of $10 million 
     in grants each fiscal year 2011 through 2015 to states and 
     Indian tribes for use in developing and implementing or 
     upgrading secure electronic warrant management systems for 
     the preparation, submission, and validation of state felony 
     warrants that are interoperable with the NCIC database. A 
     portion of these grant funds can be used to hire additional 
     personnel to validate warrants entered into the NCIC 
     database. The bill also directs the Attorney General to make 
     a total of $30 million in grants each fiscal year 2011 to 
     2015 to states and Indian tribes for extraditing fugitives 
     for prosecution and encourages their participation in the 
     U.S. Marshal's Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation 
     Service (``JPATS'') program. The bill directs the Comptroller 
     General to submit a statistical report to the House and 
     Senate Judiciary Committees on felony warrants issued by 
     state, local, and tribal governments and entered into the 
     NCIC database and on the apprehension and extradition of 
     persons with active felony warrants.
       Finally, in an enhancement of the prior FIND Act, this new 
     bill requires any state seeking a grant renewal to file 
     public reports with the Attorney General and within its own 
     county clerk's offices indicating (i) the number of 
     defendants assessed or interviewed for pretrial release; (ii) 
     the number of indigent defendants included in (i); (iii) the 
     total number of failures to appear for all defendants 
     released; and (iv) the number and type of infractions 
     committed by defendants while on pretrial release.
       I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation 
     which is designed to facilitate state and local data entry 
     into the NCIC database through grants, increase the 
     extradition of fugitives travelling in interstate commerce 
     and to ascertain whether our pretrial release programs are 
     operating effectively. The fugitive problem is national in 
     scope, involves individuals travelling in interstate 
     commerce, and requires federal solutions. By enacting this 
     bill, we take an important first step.
                                  ____


                                S. 3120

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Fugitive Information 
     Networked Database Act of 2010'' or the ``FIND Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) Nationwide, there are an estimated 2,700,000 active 
     Federal, State, and local warrants for the arrest of persons 
     charged with felony crimes.
       (2) State and local law enforcement authorities have 
     insufficient resources to devote to searching for and 
     apprehending fugitives. As a result, large numbers of 
     fugitives evade arrest. State and local law enforcement 
     authorities also lack resources for extraditing fugitives who 
     have been arrested in other States. As a result, such 
     fugitives frequently are released without prosecution.
       (3) Increasing the resources available for conducting 
     fugitive investigations and transporting fugitives between 
     States would increase the number of fugitives who are 
     arrested and prosecuted.
       (4) The United States Marshals Service (referred to in this 
     Act as the ``USMS'') plays an integral role in the 
     apprehension of fugitives in the United States, and has a 
     long history of providing assistance and expertise to 
     Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies in support 
     of fugitive investigations, including through 82 District 
     Task Forces, and through the 7 Regional Fugitive Task Force 
     Programs that have partnered with Federal, State and local 
     law enforcement agencies to locate and apprehend fugitives.
       (5) The USMS utilizes the Justice Prisoner and Alien 
     Transportation Service (referred to in this Act as the 
     ``JPATS'') to transport Federal detainees and prisoners. It 
     also makes JPATS available to State and local law enforcement 
     agencies on a reimbursable, space-available basis for the 
     purpose of transporting a fugitive from the place where the 
     fugitive was arrested to the jurisdiction that issued the 
     warrant for the arrest of the fugitive. Through JPATS, these 
     agencies are

[[Page 3501]]

     able to reduce the cost of extradition significantly.
       (6) Expanding the availability of JPATS to State and local 
     law enforcement agencies would lower the cost of transporting 
     fugitives for extradition and lead to the prosecution of a 
     greater number of fugitives.
       (7) Since 1967, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has 
     operated the National Crime Information Center, which 
     administers a nationwide database containing criminal history 
     information from the Federal Government and the States, 
     including outstanding arrest warrants. The National Crime 
     Information Center database allows a law enforcement officer 
     who stops a person in 1 State to obtain information about a 
     warrant for that person issued in another State. It contains 
     approximately 1,700,000 felony and misdemeanor warrants. It 
     is missing nearly half of the 2,800,000 to 3,200,000 of the 
     felony warrants issued across the Nation, including warrants 
     for hundreds of thousands of violent crimes.
       (8) The failure of a State to enter a warrant into the 
     National Crime Information Center database enables a fugitive 
     to escape arrest even when the fugitive is stopped by a law 
     enforcement officer in another State, because the officer is 
     not aware there was a warrant issued for the fugitive. Many 
     of such fugitives go on to commit additional crimes. In 
     addition, such fugitives pose a danger to law enforcement 
     officers who encounter them without knowledge of the pending 
     charges against the fugitives or their record of fleeing law 
     enforcement authorities.
       (9) All warrants entered into the National Crime 
     Information Center database must be validated on a regular 
     basis to ensure that the information in the warrant is still 
     accurate and that the warrant is still active.
       (10) Improving the entry and validation of warrants in the 
     National Crime Information Center database would enable law 
     enforcement officers to identify and arrest a larger number 
     of fugitives, improve the safety of these officers, and 
     better protect communities from crime.
       (11) Federal funds for State and local law enforcement are 
     most effective when they do not supplant, but rather 
     supplement State and local funds.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Active warrant.--The term ``active warrant'' means a 
     warrant that has not been cleared. A warrant may be cleared 
     by arrest or by the determination of a law enforcement agency 
     that a warrant has already been executed or that the subject 
     is deceased.
       (2) Felony warrant.--The term ``felony warrant'' means any 
     warrant for a crime that is punishable by a term of 
     imprisonment exceeding 1 year.
       (3) Indian country.--The term ``Indian country'' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 1151 of title 18, United 
     States Code.
       (4) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 102 of the Federally 
     Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 479a).
       (5) National crime information center database.--The term 
     ``National Crime Information Center database'' means the 
     computerized index of criminal justice information operated 
     by the Federal Bureau of Investigation under section 534 of 
     title 28, United States Code, and available to Federal, 
     State, and local law enforcement and other criminal justice 
     agencies.
       (6) State.--The term ``State'' means any State of the 
     United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of 
     Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and 
     the Northern Mariana Islands.
       (7) Unit of local government.--The term ``unit of local 
     government''--
       (A) means--
       (i) any city, county, township, borough, parish, village, 
     or other general purpose political subdivision of a State; or
       (ii) any law enforcement district or judicial enforcement 
     district that is established under applicable State law and 
     has the authority to, in a manner independent of other State 
     entities, establish a budget and impose taxes;
       (B) includes law enforcement agencies, courts, and any 
     other government agencies involved in the issuance of 
     warrants; and
       (C) in the case of Indian tribes, includes tribal law 
     enforcement agencies, tribal courts and any other tribal 
     agencies involved in the issuance of warrants.

     SEC. 4. GRANTS TO ENCOURAGE STATES TO ENTER FELONY WARRANTS.

       (a) Authorization of Grants.--
       (1) In general.--The Attorney General shall make grants to 
     States or Indian tribes in a manner consistent with the 
     National Criminal History Improvement Program, which shall be 
     used by States or Indian tribes, in conjunction with units of 
     local government, to--
       (A)(i) develop and implement secure, electronic State, 
     local or tribal warrant management systems that permit the 
     prompt preparation, submission, and validation of warrants 
     and are compatible and interoperable with the National Crime 
     Information Center database to facilitate information sharing 
     and to ensure that felony warrants entered into warrant 
     databases by State, local and tribal government agencies can 
     be automatically entered into the National Crime Information 
     Center database; or
       (ii) upgrade existing State, local or tribal electronic 
     warrant management systems to ensure compatibility and 
     interoperability with the National Crime Information Center 
     database to facilitate information sharing and to ensure that 
     felony warrants entered into warrant databases by State, 
     local and tribal government agencies can be automatically 
     entered into the National Crime Information Center database; 
     and
       (B) ensure that all State, local, and tribal government 
     agencies that need access to the National Crime Information 
     Center database for criminal justice purposes can access the 
     database.
       (2) Duration.--A grant awarded under this section shall 
     be--
       (A) for a period of 1 year; and
       (B) renewable at the discretion of the Attorney General if 
     the State seeking renewal submits an application to the 
     Attorney General that demonstrates compliance with subsection 
     (b)(2).
       (3) Hiring of personnel.--Not more than 5 percent of the 
     grant funds awarded under this section to each State and 
     Indian tribe may also be used to hire additional personnel, 
     as needed, to validate warrants entered into the National 
     Crime Information Center database.
       (4) Set-aside.--Not more than 5 percent of the total funds 
     available to be awarded under this section may be reserved 
     for Indian tribes.
       (b) Eligibility.--
       (1) In general.--In order to be eligible for a grant 
     authorized under subsection (a), a State or Indian tribe 
     shall submit to the Attorney General--
       (A) a plan to develop and implement, or upgrade, systems 
     described in subsection (a)(1);
       (B) a report that--
       (i) details the number of active felony warrants issued by 
     the State or Indian tribe, including felony warrants issued 
     by units of local government within the State or Indian 
     tribe;
       (ii) describes the number and type of active felony 
     warrants that have not been entered into a State, local, or 
     tribal warrant database or into the National Crime 
     Information Center database;
       (iii) explains the reasons State, local, and tribal 
     government agencies have not entered active felony warrants 
     into the National Crime Information Center database; and
       (iv) demonstrates that State, local, and tribal government 
     agencies have made good faith efforts to eliminate any such 
     backlog; and
       (C) guidelines for warrant entry by the State or Indian 
     tribe, including units of local government within the State 
     or Indian tribe, that--
       (i) ensure that felony warrants issued by the State or 
     Indian tribe, including units of local government within the 
     State or Indian tribe, will be entered into the National 
     Crime Information Center database; and
       (ii) include a description of the circumstances, if any, in 
     which, as a matter of policy, certain such warrants will not 
     be entered into the National Crime Information Center 
     database.
       (2) Deposit bail and citizens right to know.--A State that 
     submits a grant renewal application under subsection 
     (a)(3)(B) shall require that each unit of local government or 
     State pretrial services agency in such State that has 
     recieved grant funds under this section file with the 
     Attorney General and the appropriate county clerk's office of 
     jurisdiction the following public reports on defendants 
     released at the recommendation or under the supervision of 
     the unit of local government or State pretrial services 
     agency:
       (A) An annual report specifying--
       (i) the number of defendants assessed or interviewed for 
     pretrial release;
       (ii) the number of indigent defendants included in clause 
     (i);
       (iii) the number of failures to appear for a scheduled 
     court appearance; and
       (iv) the number and type of program noncompliance 
     infractions committed by a defendant released to a pretrial 
     release program.
       (B) An annual report at the end of each year, setting forth 
     the budget of the unit of local government or State pretrial 
     services agency for the reporting year.
       (c) Report to the Attorney General.--A State or Indian 
     tribe that receives a grant under this section shall, 1 year 
     after receiving the grant, submit a report to the Attorney 
     General that includes--
       (1) the number of active felony warrants issued by that 
     State or Indian tribe, including units of local government 
     within that State or Indian tribe;
       (2) the number of the active felony warrants entered into 
     the National Crime Information Center database; and
       (3) with respect to felony warrants not entered into the 
     National Crime Information Center database, the reasons for 
     not entering such warrants.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Attorney General $10,000,000 for 
     each of the fiscal years 2011 through 2015 for grants to 
     carry out the requirements of this section.

[[Page 3502]]



     SEC. 5. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION COORDINATION.

       The Federal Bureau of Investigation shall provide to State, 
     local, and tribal government agencies the technological 
     standard to ensure the compatibility and interoperability of 
     all State, local, and tribal warrant databases with the 
     National Crime Information Center database, as well as other 
     technical assistance to facilitate the implementation of 
     automated State, local, and tribal warrant management systems 
     that are compatible and interoperable with the National Crime 
     Information Center database.

     SEC. 6. REPORT REGARDING FELONY WARRANT ENTRY.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 270 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the 
     United States shall submit to the House and Senate Committees 
     on the Judiciary a report regarding--
       (1) the number of active felony warrants issued by each 
     State and Indian tribe, including felony warrants issued by 
     units of local government within the State or Indian tribe;
       (2) the number of the active felony warrants that State, 
     local, and tribal government agencies have entered into the 
     National Crime Information Center database; and
       (3) for the preceding 3 years, the number of persons in 
     each State with an active felony warrant who were--
       (A) apprehended in other States or in Indian Country but 
     not extradited; and
       (B) apprehended in other States or in Indian Country and 
     extradited.
       (b) Assistance.--To assist in the preparation of the report 
     required by subsection (a), the Attorney General shall 
     provide the Comptroller General of the United States access 
     to any information collected and reviewed in connection with 
     the grant application process described in section 4.
       (c) Report by Attorney General.--On an annual basis, the 
     Attorney General shall submit to the Committees on the 
     Judiciary of the Senate and the House of Representatives a 
     report containing the information received from the States 
     and Indian tribes under this section.

     SEC. 7. EXTRADITION ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Grant Assistance.--
       (1) Authorization of grant assistance.--
       (A) In general.--The Attorney General shall, subject to 
     paragraph (4), make grants to States and Indian tribes for 
     periods of 1 year which shall be used by States and Indian 
     tribes, including units of local government within the State 
     or Indian tribe, to extradite fugitives from another State or 
     Indian country for prosecution.
       (B) Set aside.--Not more than 5 percent of the grant 
     funding available under this section may be reserved for 
     Indian tribal governments, including tribal judicial systems.
       (2) Matching funds.--The Federal share of a grant received 
     under this section may not exceed 80 percent of the costs of 
     a program or proposal funded under this section unless the 
     Attorney General waives, wholly or in part, the requirements 
     of this paragraph in the event of extraordinary 
     circumstances.
       (3) Grant applications.--A State or Indian tribe seeking a 
     grant under this subsection shall submit an application to 
     the Attorney General that--
       (A) describes the process and any impediments to 
     extraditing fugitives apprehended in other States or in 
     Indian Country after being notified of such fugitives' 
     apprehension;
       (B) specifies the way in which grant amounts will be used, 
     including the means of transportation the State or Indian 
     tribe, or unit of local government within the State or Indian 
     tribe, intends to use for extradition and whether the State 
     or Indian tribe or unit of local government will participate 
     in the JPATS program, as well as whether it has participated 
     in that program in the past;
       (C) specifies the number of fugitives extradited by all 
     jurisdictions within that State or Indian tribe for each of 
     the 3 years preceding the date of the grant application; and
       (D) specifies the total amount spent by all jurisdictions 
     within that State or Indian tribe on fugitive extraditions 
     for each of the 3 years preceding the date of the grant 
     application.
       (4) Eligibility.--
       (A) In general.--In determining whether to award a grant 
     under this section to a State or Indian tribe, the Attorney 
     General shall consider the following:
       (i) The information in the application submitted under 
     paragraph (3).
       (ii) The percentage of felony warrants issued by the State 
     or Indian tribe, including units of local government within 
     the State or Indian tribe, that were entered into the 
     National Crime Information Center database, as calculated 
     with the information provided under subsection (b) and, 
     beginning 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     whether the State or Indian tribe has made substantial 
     progress in improving the entry of felony warrants into the 
     National Crime Information Center database.
       (iii) For grants issued after an initial 1 year grant, 
     whether the State or Indian tribe, including units of local 
     government within the State or Indian tribe, has increased 
     substantially the number of fugitives extradited for 
     prosecution.
       (B) Preferences.--In allocating extradition grants under 
     this section, the Attorney General should give preference to 
     States or Indian tribes that--
       (i) 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act, have 
     entered at least 50 percent of active felony warrants into 
     the National Crime Information Center database;
       (ii) 5 years after the date of enactment of this Act, have 
     entered at least 70 percent of active felony warrants into 
     the National Crime Information Center database; and
       (iii) 7 years after the date of enactment of this Act, have 
     entered at least 90 percent of active felony warrants into 
     the National Crime Information Center database.
       (5) Use of funds.--States and Indian tribes, including 
     units of local government within the State or Indian tribe, 
     receiving a grant under this section may use grant monies to 
     credit the costs of transporting State and local detainees on 
     behalf of such State to the Justice Prisoner and Alien 
     Transportation System.
       (6) Record keeping.--States and Indian tribes, including 
     units of local government within the State or Indian tribe, 
     that receive a grant under this section shall maintain and 
     report such data, records, and information (programmatic and 
     financial) as the Attorney General may require.
       (7) Audit.--
       (A) In general.--The Attorney General shall conduct an 
     audit of the use of funds by States and Indian tribes 
     receiving grants under this section 18 months after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act and biennially thereafter.
       (B) Ineligibility.--A State or Indian tribe, or unit of 
     local government within a State or Indian tribe, that fails 
     to increase substantially the number of fugitives extradited 
     after receiving a grant under this section will be ineligible 
     for future funds.
       (8) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $30,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2011 through 2015.
       (b) Active Felony Warrants Issued by States and Indian 
     Tribes.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter on a date 
     designated by the Attorney General, to assist the Attorney 
     General in making a determination under subsection (a)(4) 
     concerning eligibility to receive a grant, each State and 
     Indian tribe applying for a grant under this section shall 
     submit to the Attorney General--
       (A) the total number of active felony warrants issued by 
     the State or Indian tribe, including units of local 
     government within the State or Indian tribe, regardless of 
     the age of the warrants; and
       (B) a description of the categories of felony warrants not 
     entered into the National Crime Information Center database 
     and the reasons for not entering such warrants.
       (2) Failure to provide.--A State or Indian tribe that fails 
     to provide the information described in paragraph (1) by the 
     date required under such paragraph shall be ineligible to 
     receive any funds under subsection (a), until such date as it 
     provides the information described in paragraph (1) to the 
     Attorney General.
       (c) Attorney General Report.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than January 31 of each year, 
     the Attorney General shall submit to the Committee on the 
     Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of 
     the House of Representatives a report--
       (A) containing the information submitted by the States and 
     Indian tribes under subsection (b);
       (B) containing the percentage of active felony warrants 
     issued by those States and Indian tribes that has been 
     entered into the National Crime Information Center database, 
     as determined under subsection (a)(4)(A)(ii);
       (C) containing a description of the categories of felony 
     warrants that have not been entered into the National Crime 
     Information Center database and the reasons such warrants 
     were not entered, as provided to the Attorney General under 
     subsection (b)(1);
       (D) comparing the warrant entry information to data from 
     previous years and describing the progress of States and 
     Indian tribes in entering active felony warrants into the 
     National Crime Information Center database;
       (E) containing the number of persons that each State or 
     Indian tribe, including units of local government within the 
     State or Indian tribe, has extradited from other States or in 
     Indian country for prosecution and describing any progress 
     the State or Indian tribe has made in improving the number of 
     fugitives extradited for prosecution; and
       (F) describing the practices of the States and Indian 
     tribes regarding the collection, maintenance, automation, and 
     transmittal of felony warrants to the National Crime 
     Information Center, that the Attorney General considers to be 
     best practices.
       (2) Best practices.--Not later than January 31 of each 
     year, the Attorney General shall provide the information 
     regarding best practices, referred to in paragraph (1)(F), to 
     each State and Indian tribe submitting information to the 
     National Crime Information Center.

[[Page 3503]]


                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Specter, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Bennet, 
        Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. Casey, Ms. Klobuchar, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. 
        Brown of Ohio, Mr. Udall of New Mexico, Mr. Durbin, Mrs. 
        Murray, Mr. Schumer, and Mr. Sanders):
  S. 3123. A bill to amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch 
Act to require the Secretary of Agriculture to carry out a program to 
assist eligible schools and nonprofit entities through grants and 
technical assistance to implement farm to school programs that improve 
access to local foods in eligible schools; to the Committee on 
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce my Growing Farm 
to School Programs Act of 2010. This important proposal will support 
grassroots efforts all across our Nation to improve the health and 
well-being of children while supporting local farmers and bolstering 
local economies.
  I am pleased to have 13 of my respected Senate colleagues from across 
the country join with me today as original cosponsors of this bill. 
Farm to School is a proven, common-sense, community-driven approach to 
incorporate farm fresh local food into school meals. Schools nationwide 
understand the many benefits of farm to school but often lack the 
startup funding and the technical capacity to plan and implement the 
program. This bill will provide the important seed money and technical 
assistance needed to enable our schools to teach children about good 
nutrition and show them the importance of agriculture while also 
supporting local farms.
  It is amazing how far some farm products travel to get to our school 
cafeterias, and how heavily processed it is when it arrives. While our 
Nation's schools should provide an enormous market for our struggling 
small and mid-sized farmers, for far too long the products grown by our 
family farms have largely been absent from school lunch trays. We 
should not be surprised that many kids today do not understand the link 
between the food they eat and farms on which it is raised. By offering 
our children local, fresh, less-processed choices, and a chance to 
learn how and where their food is grown we can also provide economic 
benefits for small, local farms and keep food dollars within the 
community.
  Communities and schools all across our Nation are beginning to link 
farms and school with great success. In my home State of Vermont, from 
rural towns across the state to the city of Burlington, many of our 
schools have integrated school meals with classroom learning and local 
agriculture. As more schools create these important connections, 
neighboring communities are often also eager to start similar programs. 
Unfortunately many of these schools do not have sufficient staff, 
expertise, equipment, or funding to start a Farm to School program on 
their own. The Growing Farm to Schools Programs Act will provide the 
small amount of funding and technical assistance that these schools 
need to create a program. Once in place, these programs can be expected 
to be self-sustaining.
  In introducing the Growing Farm to School Programs Act of 2010, I am 
hoping that we will be able to provide more communities, schools, and 
farmers the opportunity to grow and cultivate Farm to School programs. 
I thank my 13 co-sponsors and urge my other colleagues to join us in 
support of this exciting initiative.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 3123

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Growing Farm to School 
     Programs Act of 2010''.

     SEC. 2. ACCESS TO LOCAL FOODS: FARM TO SCHOOL PROGRAM.

       Section 18 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1769) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (h) and (i) as subsections 
     (i) and (j), respectively;
       (2) in subsection (g), by striking ``(g) Access to Local 
     Foods and School Gardens.--'' and all that follows through 
     ``(3) Pilot program for high-poverty schools.--'' and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(g) Access to Local Foods: Farm to School Program.--
       ``(1) Definition of eligible school.--In this subsection, 
     the term `eligible school' means a school or institution that 
     participates in a program under this Act or the school 
     breakfast program established under section 4 of the Child 
     Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773).
       ``(2) Program.--The Secretary shall carry out a program to 
     assist eligible schools, State and local agencies, Indian 
     tribal organizations, agricultural producers or groups of 
     agricultural producers, and nonprofit entities through grants 
     and technical assistance to implement farm to school programs 
     that improve access to local foods in eligible schools.
       ``(3) Grants.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall award competitive 
     grants under this subsection to be used for--
       ``(i) training;
       ``(ii) supporting operations;
       ``(iii) planning;
       ``(iv) purchasing equipment;
       ``(v) developing school gardens;
       ``(vi) developing partnerships; and
       ``(vii) implementing farm to school programs.
       ``(B) Regional balance.--In making awards under this 
     subsection, the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent 
     practicable, ensure--
       ``(i) geographical diversity; and
       ``(ii) equitable treatment of urban, rural, and tribal 
     communities.
       ``(C) Maximum amount.--The total amount provided to a grant 
     recipient under this subsection shall not exceed $100,000.
       ``(4) Federal share.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Federal share of costs for a project 
     funded through a grant awarded under this subsection shall 
     not exceed 75 percent of the total cost of the project.
       ``(B) Federal matching.--As a condition of receiving a 
     grant under this subsection, a grant recipient shall provide 
     matching support in the form of cash or in-kind 
     contributions, including facilities, equipment, or services 
     provided by State and local governments, nonprofit 
     organizations, and private sources.
       ``(5) Criteria for selection.--To the maximum extent 
     practicable, in providing assistance under this subsection, 
     the Secretary shall give the highest priority to funding 
     projects that, as determined by the Secretary--
       ``(A) benefit local small- and medium-sized farms;
       ``(B) make local food products available on the menu of the 
     eligible school;
       ``(C) serve a high proportion of children who are eligible 
     for free or reduced price lunches;
       ``(D) incorporate experiential nutrition education 
     activities in curriculum planning that encourage the 
     participation of school children in farm and garden-based 
     agricultural education activities;
       ``(E) demonstrate collaboration between eligible schools, 
     nongovernmental and community-based organizations, 
     agricultural producer groups, and other community partners;
       ``(F) include adequate and participatory evaluation plans;
       ``(G) demonstrate the potential for long-term program 
     sustainability; and
       ``(H) meet any other criteria that the Secretary determines 
     appropriate.
       ``(6) Evaluation.--As a condition of receiving a grant 
     under this subsection, each grant recipient shall agree to 
     cooperate in an evaluation by the Secretary of the program 
     carried out using grant funds.
       ``(7) Technical assistance.--The Secretary shall provide 
     technical assistance and information to assist eligible 
     schools, State and local agencies, Indian tribal 
     organizations, and nonprofit entities--
       ``(A) to facilitate the coordination and sharing of 
     information and resources in the Department that may be 
     applicable to the farm to school program;
       ``(B) to collect and share information on best practices; 
     and
       ``(C) to disseminate research and data on existing farm to 
     school programs and the potential for programs in underserved 
     areas.
       ``(8) Funding.--
       ``(A) In general.--On October 1, 2010, out of any funds in 
     the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the Secretary of the 
     Treasury shall transfer to the Secretary to carry out this 
     subsection $50,000,000, to remain available until expended.
       ``(B) Receipt and acceptance.--The Secretary shall be 
     entitled to receive, shall accept, and shall use to carry out 
     this subsection the funds transferred under subparagraph (A), 
     without further appropriation.
       ``(h) Pilot Program for High-Poverty Schools.--
       ``(1) In general.--''; and
       (3) in subsection (h) (as redesignated by paragraph (2))--

[[Page 3504]]

       (A) in subparagraph (F) of paragraph (1) (as so 
     redesignated), by striking ``in accordance with paragraph 
     (1)(H)'' and inserting ``carried out by the Secretary''; and
       (B) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (2).

     SEC. 3. BUDGETARY EFFECTS.

       The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of 
     complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go-Act of 2010, shall 
     be determined by reference to the latest statement titled 
     ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation'' for this Act, 
     submitted for printing in the Congressional Record by the 
     Chairman of the House Budget Committee, provided that such 
     statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.

                          ____________________