[Senate Report 104-269]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 384
104th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 104-269
_______________________________________________________________________
TO REAUTHORIZE THE HATE CRIME STATISTICS ACT
_______
May 13, 1996.--Ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Hatch, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 1624]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the
bill (S. 1624) to reauthorize the Hate Crime Statistics Act,
having considered the same, reports favorably thereon and
recommend that the bill do pass.
I. Purpose
The purpose of the proposed legislation is to reauthorize
permanently the Hate Crime Statistics Act, which requires the
Attorney General to establish reporting guidelines for the
collection of, and to collect, data about crimes which manifest
evidence of prejudice based on race, religion, sexual
orientation, ethnicity or disability. Reauthorization of the
Act is necessary to require the Attorney General to continue
the collection of data on hate crimes and to publish annual
summaries of the acquired data, thereby providing information
which can help local law enforcement agencies and local
communities combat hate crimes more effectively by identifying
over time their frequency, location, and other patterns.
II. Legislative History
The Hate Crimes Statistics Act was signed into law on April
23, 1990. The Act required the Attorney General acquire data
about crimes which manifest evidence of prejudice based on
race, religion, sexual orientation or ethnicity, including the
crimes of murder, non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape,
aggravated assault, simple assault, intimidation, arson and
destruction, damage or vandalism of property. In 1994, the Act
was amended to add crimes which manifest prejudice based on
disability. The Attorney General was also required to establish
guidelines for the collection of such data, including the
evidence and criteria that must be present for a finding of
manifest prejudice in connection with the classification of a
crime as bias-motivated. The Act stipulated that the data be
acquired for calendar year 1990 and each of the four succeeding
calendar years. In addition, the Act mandated the Attorney
General to publish an annual summary of the acquired data.
The Act did not create a private right of action, including
an action based on sexual orientation, or limit any existing
cause of action or right to bring an action, including under
the Administrative Procedure Act. The Act also provides that
nothing in the Act shall be construed, nor shall any funds
appropriated to carry out the purpose of the Act be used, to
promote or encourage homosexuality, and includes congressional
findings: ``(1) the American family life is the foundation of
American Society, (2) Federal policy should encourage the well-
being, financial security, and health of the American family,
(3) schools should not de-emphasize the critical value of
American family life.''
III. Text of S. 1624, as Reported
[104th Cong; 2d Sess.]
A BILL To reauthorize the Hate Crime Statistics Act, and for other
purposes
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION.
The first section of the Hate Crime Statistics Act (28
U.S.C. 534 note) is amended:
(1) in subsection (b), by striking ``for the calendar
year 1990 and each of the succeeding 4 calendar years''
and inserting ``for each calendar year''; and
(2) in subsection (c), by striking ``through fiscal
year 1994''.
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1
This section amends the Hate Crime Statistics Act by
striking from subsection (b)(1) the language ``for the calendar
year 1990 and each of the succeeding 4 calendar years'' and
inserting ``for each calendar year.'' This section further
amends the Act by striking from subsection (c) the words
``through fiscal year 1994.''
V. Discussion
Prior to the adoption of the Hate Crime Statistics Act,
there was no national data collection on crimes motivated by
bias and prejudice. While individual incidents of hate crimes
were sometimes reported in the news media, the absence of
national data made it difficult to determine the actual number
and nature of such incidents, whether particular incidents were
isolated events or symptoms of a more pervasive problem,
whether certain groups are more frequently victimized than
others, and whether hate-related violence is more prevalent in
particular sections of the country or in particular
communities.
As set forth in the statement of Mr. Charles W. Archer,
Assistant Director, Criminal Justice Information Services
Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, before the Judiciary
Committee at its hearing on reauthorization of the Hate Crime
Statistics Act held on March 19, 1996, when the Act was enacted
in 1990, the Attorney General delegated to the FBI the
development of a hate crime data collection program and
implementation of the Act. To lessen the reporting burden
placed on State and local law enforcement agencies, the FBI
consolidated this program within the FBI's existing Uniform
Crime Reports Summary and National Incident-Based Reporting
Systems and developed uniform standards and procedures which
define and help identify criminal offenses that are motivated
by the offender's bias against the victim's race, religion,
disability, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. Because hate
crimes are not separate, distinct offenses, but rather
traditional crimes that are motivated by the offender's bias,
hate crime reporting is complicated to the extent that there is
difficulty in determining the offender's motivation. Incidents
are reported as hate crimes only if the law enforcement
investigation determines sufficient facts to lead a reasonable
and prudent person to conclude that the offender's actions were
motivated, in whole or in part, by bias. To help local law
enforcement agencies develop methods by which to identify hate
crimes accurately, the FBI has made the education and training
of local law enforcement officers in the investigation,
identification, reporting and appropriate handling of hate
crimes a priority.
Like all other crimes reported under the Uniform Crime
Reports, participation by State and local law enforcement
agencies in the hate crime data collection program is
voluntary. During 1991, the first full year of the collection
program, a total of 2,771 agencies in 32 States submitted data.
By 1994, that figure had increased to approximately 7,400 law
enforcement agencies from 43 States and the District of
Columbia, representing 58 percent of the United States
population.
Every crime is, of course, is a terrible event. But the
hate crime is of a particularly insidious nature. Americans
cherish their individualism, and are proud to be a society of
individualists and of individual rights. But individual human
beings flourish best as members of families, neighborhoods,
communities and our Nation. As Steven Arent of the Anti-
Defamation League testified at the March 19, 1996, hearing,
``(t)he damage done by hate crimes cannot be measured solely in
terms of physical injury or dollars and cents.'' The hate crime
atomizes the individual, splitting the individual victim apart
from his or her neighbors and community. It isolates the victim
because of who he or she is. The hate crime emphasizes the
differences among our people, not as the strengths they are in
this diverse country, but as a means of dividing American from
American. It submerges the common humanity of all peoples. A
physical assault upon one's person is horrible enough; when the
attack is made because of the victim's religion, race,
ethnicity, disability, or sexual orientation, it inevitably
creates additional unease, not only on the part of the
individual victim, but also all of those who are members of the
same group. For persons who are members of minority groups with
a history of persecution or mistreatment, hate crimes cause an
anxiety and concern for the safety that others may take for
granted. This legislation, and the collection of data on hate
crimes, can help us address this serious problem within our
society.
The Hate Crime Statistics Act has proven successful in its
initial purpose, the creation of a national data base and
system for the collection of data on bias-motivated crime. In
addition, the Act has served as a catalyst for an FBI effort to
train State and local law enforcement officials about hate
crimes. Hearings held before the Senate Judiciary Committee's
Subcommittee on the Constitution in 1992 and 1994 showed that
one of the prime benefits of the Act has been to help increase
the awareness and sensitivity of law enforcement with respect
to hate crimes. Not only do victims of hate crimes benefit from
a more informed police force, but greater police awareness
encourages other victims to report hate crimes. Collection of
this data has helped alert local communities and their law
enforcement agencies to patterns of hate crimes in their
neighborhoods and perhaps helped prevent them. In addition, as
Kansas City Mayor Emanuel Cleaver III and Karen Lawson,
executive director of the Leadership Conference Education Fund,
indicated during their testimony at the Committee's March 19,
1996, hearing, the Act has also helped spur educational efforts
aimed at enhancing goodwill in our communities.
While collecting data on hate crimes will not erase
bigotry, it does provide a valuable tool in the fight against
bias-motivated criminal conduct. The information collected
pursuant to this Act is essential in identifying how law
enforcement should focus its resources in dealing with hate
crimes. The more informed we are about the scope and nature of
our communities'' problems with hate crimes, the better we will
be able to develop effective prevention and prosecution
strategies, as well as support structures for victims of these
crimes. The Hate Crime Statistics Act has proven its usefulness
and deserves the permanent mandate that would be established by
this bill.
VI. Committee Action
S. 1624 was introduced in the Senate on March 19, 1996,
sponsored by Senators Hatch and Simon, and cosponsored by
Senators Specter, Biden, Simpson, Kennedy, Grassley, Kohl,
DeWine, Feinstein, McConnell, Johnston, D'Amato, Akaka,
Bingaman, Boxer, Bradley, Campbell, Chafee, Cohen, Dodd,
Inouye, Jeffords, Kassebaum, Kerry, Levin, Lieberman, Murray,
Pell, Sarbanes, Wellstone, Harkin, Wyden, and Lautenberg.
The Committee on the Judiciary held a hearing on S. 1624
and the issue of the bias-motivated crimes and permanent
reauthorization of the Hate Crime Statistics Act on March 19,
1996. Testimony was taken from Mr. Charles W. Archer, Assistant
Director, Criminal Justice Information Services Division,
Federal Bureau of Investigation; Hon. Emanuel Cleaver III,
Mayor of Kansas City, MO, on behalf of the United States
Conference of Mayors; Mr. Bobby Moody, Chief of Police,
Covington, GA, on behalf of the International Association of
Chiefs of Police; Mr. Stephen Arent, Anti-Defamation League;
and Ms. Karen Lawson, executive director, Leadership Conference
Education Fund.
The Senate Committee on the Judiciary, with a quorum
present, met on Thursday, April 25, 1996, to mark up S. 1624.
The Committee on the Judiciary passed S. 1624 by voice vote.
VII. Regulatory Impact Statement
Pursuant to paragraph 11(b), rule XXVI of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, the Committee, after due consideration,
concludes that S. 1624 will not have direct regulatory impact.
VIII. Cost Estimate
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, May 7, 1996.
Hon. Orrin G. Hatch,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
reviewed S. 1624, a bill to reauthorize the Hate Crime
Statistics Act, and for other purposes, as reported by the
Senate Committee on the Judiciary on April 25, 1996. CBO
estimates that enacting the bill would result in no significant
costs to the federal government. S. 1624 would not affect
direct spending or receipts, so pay-as-you-go procedures would
not apply. The bill contains no intergovernmental or private
sector mandates as defined in Public Law 104-4, and would
impose no direct costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
S. 1624 would reauthorize the Hate Crime Statistics Act,
which expired at the end of fiscal year 1994 and required the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to collect and report
statistics on hate crimes. The FBI estimates that it spent less
than $500,000 in each of the fiscal years 1990 through 1996 to
comply with the act. Thus, enacting S. 1624 would have no
significant impact on federal spending.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark
Grabowicz.
Sincerely,
June E. O'Neill, Director.
IX. Changes in Existing Law
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the changes in existing law made
by the bill as reported by the Committee, are shown as follows
(existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in bold
brackets, new matter is printed in italic, and existing law
with no changes is printed in roman):
UNITED STATES CODE
* * * * * * *
TITLE 28--JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 33--FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
* * * * * * *
Sec. 534. Acquisition, preservation, and exchange of identification
records and information; appointment of officials
(a) The Attorney General shall--
* * * * * * *
(b)(1) Under the authority of section 534 of title 28,
United States Code, the Attorney General shall acquire data,
[for the calendar year 1990 and each of the succeeding 4
calendar years] for each calendar year, about crimes that
manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, religion,
disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, including where
appropriate the crimes of murder, non-negligent manslaughter;
forcible rape; aggravated assault, simple assault,
intimidation; arson; and destruction, damage or vandalism of
property.
(c) There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as
may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this section
[through fiscal year 1994].