[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 7819-7822]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         RAPID DNA ACT OF 2017

  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 510) to establish a system for integration of Rapid DNA 
instruments for use by law enforcement to reduce violent crime and 
reduce the current DNA analysis backlog.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                H.R. 510

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

[[Page 7820]]



     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Rapid DNA Act of 2017''.

     SEC. 2. RAPID DNA INSTRUMENTS.

       (a) Standards.--Section 210303(a) of the DNA Identification 
     Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14131(a)) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(5)(A) In addition to issuing standards as provided in 
     paragraphs (1) through (4), the Director of the Federal 
     Bureau of Investigation shall issue standards and procedures 
     for the use of Rapid DNA instruments and resulting DNA 
     analyses.
       ``(B) In this Act, the term `Rapid DNA instruments' means 
     instrumentation that carries out a fully automated process to 
     derive a DNA analysis from a DNA sample.''.
       (b) Index.--Paragraph (2) of section 210304(b) of the DNA 
     Identification Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14132(b)(2)) is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(2) prepared by--
       ``(A) laboratories that--
       ``(i) have been accredited by a nonprofit professional 
     association of persons actively involved in forensic science 
     that is nationally recognized within the forensic science 
     community; and
       ``(ii) undergo external audits, not less than once every 2 
     years, that demonstrate compliance with standards established 
     by the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; or
       ``(B) criminal justice agencies using Rapid DNA instruments 
     approved by the Director of the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation in compliance with the standards and procedures 
     issued by the Director under section 210303(a)(5); and''.

     SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS RELATING TO COLLECTION OF DNA 
                   IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION.

       (a) From Certain Federal Offenders.--Section 3 of the DNA 
     Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135a) 
     is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), by adding at the end the following: 
     ``The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation may 
     waive the requirements under this subsection if DNA samples 
     are analyzed by means of Rapid DNA instruments and the 
     results are included in CODIS.''; and
       (2) in subsection (c), by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) The term `Rapid DNA instruments' means 
     instrumentation that carries out a fully automated process to 
     derive a DNA analysis from a DNA sample.''.
       (b) From Certain District of Columbia Offenders.--Section 4 
     of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 (42 
     U.S.C. 14135b) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), by adding at the end the following: 
     ``The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation may 
     waive the requirements under this subsection if DNA samples 
     are analyzed by means of Rapid DNA instruments and the 
     results are included in CODIS.''; and
       (2) in subsection (c), by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) The term `Rapid DNA instruments' means 
     instrumentation that carries out a fully automated process to 
     derive a DNA analysis from a DNA sample.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.


                             General Leave

  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks and to include extraneous materials on H.R. 510, currently 
under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  The House of Representatives works on many important issues, but few 
are more important than making sure that innocent arrestees are 
promptly released and that culpable suspects are not released to strike 
again.
  Rapid DNA technology has the potential to do both of those things 
and, as such, can be an important tool for law enforcement and a key 
component of this body's ongoing efforts on criminal justice reform.
  I applaud the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) for 
reintroducing H.R. 510, the Rapid DNA Act of 2017, in this session of 
Congress.
  With Rapid DNA technology, it is possible to test the DNA of 
arrestees as soon as they are in custody and determine within hours 
whether they match the DNA profile from a crime scene or from other 
earlier crimes.
  This technology would also enable police to check the Federal DNA 
database to see if an arrestee matches the DNA profile from previous 
crimes for which a DNA sample exists but no known suspect has been 
identified.
  Rather than waiting weeks for a DNA sample to be processed and risk 
releasing a suspect back into the public to potentially reoffend, 
creating new victims, police will be able to determine at initial 
booking if the suspect is a person of interest in other crimes.
  This bill will provide important tools for law enforcement. For 
instance, it will inform decisions about pretrial release or detention 
and their conditions. It will solve and prevent all crimes, including 
violent crimes. By freeing up forensic analysts, it will prevent DNA 
analysis backlogs.
  I believe this is necessary, responsible legislation that will aid 
law enforcement and protect American citizens by keeping offenders off 
the streets. I again thank Congressman Sensenbrenner for sponsoring 
this important legislation, and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor 
of this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise in strong support of H.R. 510, the Rapid DNA Act of 2017. I 
also want to salute Mr. Sensenbrenner for his hard work on it.
  This bipartisan legislation would integrate Rapid DNA technology into 
the FBI's Combined DNA Index System, popularly known as CODIS, to 
enable law enforcement to perform valuable investigative functions 
faster and more efficiently.
  DNA technology is a valuable, dynamic, and rapidly unfolding element 
of our criminal justice system. DNA technology helps us to identify 
suspects, eliminate false suspects, exonerate the innocent, and 
ultimately to convict responsible perpetrators of crime. My State of 
Maryland is home to the first capital prisoner in the United States who 
was exonerated while in prison for a homicide with DNA technology.
  CODIS and the National DNA Index System play a critical role across 
the country in criminal investigations by Federal, State, and local law 
enforcement agencies. Rapid DNA involves a fully automated, hands-free 
process designed to produce a DNA profile within minutes at the booking 
stage outside of a crime lab.
  Existing law does not provide for the inclusion of Rapid DNA analyses 
into CODIS. H.R. 510 would bridge the gap between Rapid DNA technology 
and CODIS by authorizing law enforcement to conduct Rapid DNA analyses 
and upload the results to the national index, as long as the Rapid DNA 
machines that are used are accredited. This adds a real-time layer to 
CODIS and saves us all significant time and resources, improving 
efficiency in the criminal justice process.
  H.R. 510 has significant practical and positive consequences for law 
enforcement and for public safety. For example, Detroit, as of this 
April, has tested approximately 10,000 backlogged sexual assault kits. 
As a result, there have been more than 2,600 DNA matches, including 
CODIS hits; the identification of nearly 800 potential serial rapists; 
92 convictions obtained by the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office; and 
DNA crimes linked to 40 other States and the District of Columbia.
  The addition of Rapid DNA information to the CODIS database will help 
identify serial rapists if matches are made to the lab analyses of the 
sexual assault kit samples.
  I hope that the use of Rapid DNA will allow other DNA labs to focus 
more of their resources on reducing the backlog of untested sexual 
assault kits across the country. My home State of Maryland has 3,700 
untested rape kits right now, according to a report done last year.
  Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to join the chairman and those of 
us in the minority in supporting this important legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the former chairman

[[Page 7821]]

of the House Judiciary Committee and the chief author of this 
legislation.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Goodlatte) for yielding me this time.
  Rapid DNA is a promising new technology that allows for the almost 
immediate DNA analysis of an arrestee. Unlike standard DNA practices, 
which require sending DNA samples from arrestees out to labs with a 
result taking weeks to ascertain, Rapid DNA results take only a few 
hours and can be done right at the booking station. Like 
fingerprinting, photographing, and other booking procedures which at 
the time were novel but now have become routine, Rapid DNA will soon be 
standard procedure in police stations throughout the country.
  There is only one problem with Rapid DNA technology: Federal law. Our 
law, written in 1994 when DNA technology was still in its infancy, 
prohibits the use of Rapid DNA technology in booking stations. This is 
not because of any limitation in Rapid DNA technology, but simply 
because at that time Rapid DNA technology was not even contemplated. 
Similar to the transformation of musical devices--records leading to 
cassette tapes, cassette tapes leading to CDs, CDs leading to MP3, and 
now iPods and online music hosting services--technology moves quicker 
than we can legislate. Now is the time to change the law to permit 
Rapid DNA technology.
  Rapid DNA machines are compact, approximately the size of copy 
machines, and can provide a DNA analysis from a cheek swab sample of an 
arrestee within 2 hours. This has two profound implications. First, 
arrestees may be exonerated of crimes in 2 hours rather than waiting 
for up to 72 hours for release, or months for more standard DNA 
testing. Second, those arrested for a crime can quickly be matched to 
other unsolved crimes where there was forensic evidence left at the 
crime scene but for which there was no identified suspect.
  The Rapid DNA Act updates the current law to allow DNA samples to be 
processed using Rapid DNA instruments located in booking stations and 
other approved locations. The bill will require the FBI to issue 
standards and procedures for the use of such instruments and their 
resulting DNA analyses to ensure the integrity of such instruments and 
the accuracy of the results. It will permit those results to be 
included in the DNA index if criminal justice agencies taking the 
samples comply with the standards and procedures that the FBI approves. 
In this way, the bill would permit this new category of DNA samples to 
be uploaded into the index with the same protections and quality 
standards as current DNA samples.
  Not only does Rapid DNA have the potential to reduce crime, help 
expeditiously exonerate the innocent, but also to positively impact the 
current backlogs for rape kits and other DNA sample analysis.
  This committee has spent a great deal of time and significant work to 
try to reduce the forensic DNA backlog, especially in rape kits. Rapid 
DNA could not at this time be used for rape kits, but the 
implementation of Rapid DNA will allow forensic labs to focus on 
forensic samples, not on identification samples which can easily be 
handled by Rapid DNA machines. I hope this will reduce the rape kit 
backlog, which will also prevent future rapes from happening.
  I am pleased that the House is taking a significant step in 
furthering the use of this technology. I urge my colleagues to support 
this legislation.
  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).
  Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Raskin for his kind words and his 
work on this. I particularly thank Mr. Sensenbrenner for his work. He 
has been the sponsor of this since it was introduced. I was an original 
sponsor since it was introduced as well. It makes a lot of sense for us 
to do this and get DNA evidence and use science to the advantage of the 
American people, and particularly in law enforcement where we have 
problems in identifying suspects and proving guilt on occasion, and 
also exonerating the innocent. DNA is a perfect tool as it exonerates 
the wrongfully accused and gets the person who has committed the crime.
  I am honored to be a part of this. This bill, while a small part in 
the big picture, shows that Democrats and Republicans can work together 
to get some things done. I appreciate the honor to be able to sponsor, 
and I appreciate Mr. Sensenbrenner's work.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I don't have any additional speakers, and 
I reserve the balance of my time to close.
  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The Rapid DNA Act is strongly supported by several organizations 
which know that the expanded use and availability of Rapid DNA will 
enhance public safety by reducing the DNA backlog, reducing violent 
crime, and allowing law enforcement to investigate crimes and identify 
suspects with greater efficiency and accuracy. The organizations 
include the National Center for Victims of Crime; the Police 
Foundation, which works to improve policing through innovation and 
science; and the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association.

                              {time}  1615

  Mr. Speaker, in the case that I referred to before, the Bloodsworth 
case from Maryland, this was a gentleman who was convicted of a grisly 
rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl. He swore he hadn't done it. He 
was convicted. In court he swore every day that he was the wrong guy.
  When DNA technology was first unveiled, he read about it. He begged 
his lawyer who is now the chief judge on the D.C. Superior Court, Judge 
Morin, to get the DNA test done. That lawyer took $5,000 out of his own 
pocket to do the DNA test, and it came back with greater than 99 
percent certainty it could not have been Bloodsworth.
  Then the DNA evidence provided an exact match to a prisoner who was a 
floor below Bloodsworth at the time. So they found the right guy, and 
he was about to get out of prison a few months later.
  The DNA evidence establishes an extraordinary new era that we are in 
in terms of criminal justice, and I am proud to be supporting this 
legislation that Mr. Sensenbrenner has brought forward, which I think 
will improve accuracy and efficiency all around. I applaud his efforts 
and the efforts of our chairman to ensure the integrity and the quality 
of the analysis that will be used in the criminal justice system.
  I urge all of our colleagues to join me in voting for H.R. 510 today.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill. It is a bipartisan 
bill. I thank Members on both sides of the aisle for their 
contributions to this effort. I again commend the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) for reintroducing this bill. I urge my 
colleagues to support the bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 
510, the Rapid DNA Act of 2017.
  The Rapid DNA Act, or H.R. 510, will aid law enforcement in its 
effort to solve cases and bring justice to the victims of crimes. In 
particular, victims of rape and sexual assault will be able to regain 
peace of mind because this legislation increases the likelihood that 
these perpetrators will be captured. The language of the Rapid DNA Act 
gives law enforcement investigators the ability to facilitate the quick 
testing of DNA tests, such as rape kits. DNA material is sensitive and 
has only a limited time before it is rendered useless. This act 
addresses the issue by removing some of the preexisting regulations and 
red tape that have hindered this process in the past.
  It is a disservice to the American people to deny them the results 
from a Rape Kit. They deserve the truth. The Constitution of the United 
States ensures that every citizen of the United States of America has 
the right to privacy, as stated in the Fourth Amendment to the Bill of 
Rights of the U.S. Constitution. The Rapid DNA Act of 2017 will 
increase the chance that those who committed such wrongs and those who 
have inhumanely violated the basic rights and dignity of another

[[Page 7822]]

person are brought to justice by streamlining the process and by 
reducing regulations around the testing of these kits.
  H.R. 510 would provide amendments to the DNA Identification Act of 
1994 and the DNA Backlog Analysis Backlog Act of 2000 that require more 
external regulation for all Rapid DNA tests. Organizations performing 
such tests would still be audited by the Federal government to ensure 
the quality of test. It will also be accredited by credible, nonprofit 
institutions that will lend the imprimatur of reliability.
  I fully support this measure and I am firmly committed to bringing 
justice to offenders of these crimes. This bill will provide relief to 
the countless victims of sexual assault. Rape kits often go untested 
because of existing regulations that make it more difficult to test 
such time sensitive data. I support this legislation.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 510.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________