[House Report 106-455]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 106-455
======================================================================
STALKING PREVENTION AND VICTIM PROTECTION ACT OF 1999
_______
November 5, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Hyde, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 1869]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 1869) amending title 18, United States Code, to
expand the prohibition on stalking, and for other purposes,
having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an
amendment and recommends that the bill as amended do pass.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
The Amendment.............................................. 2
Purpose and Summary........................................ 2
Background and Need for the Legislation.................... 3
Hearings................................................... 4
Committee Consideration.................................... 4
Vote of the Committee...................................... 5
Committee Oversight Findings............................... 5
Committee on Government Reform Findings.................... 5
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures.................. 5
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate.................. 5
Constitutional Authority Statement......................... 6
Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion................. 6
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported...... 7
The amendment is as follows:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu
thereof the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Stalking Prevention and Victim
Protection Act of 1999''.
SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF THE PROHIBITION ON STALKING.
(a) In General.--Section 2261A of title 18, United States Code, is
amended to read as follows:
``Sec. 2261A. Stalking
``(a) Whoever--
``(1) for the purpose of stalking an individual, travels or
causes another to travel in interstate or foreign commerce,
uses or causes another to use the mail or any facility in
interstate or foreign commerce, or enters or leaves, or causes
another to enter or leave, Indian country; or
``(2) within the special maritime and territorial
jurisdiction of the United States or within Indian country,
stalks an individual;
shall be punished as provided in section 2261.
``(b) For purposes of this section--
``(1) a person stalks an individual if that person engages
in conduct--
``(A) with the intent to injure or harass the
individual; and
``(B) that places the individual in reasonable fear
of the death of, or serious bodily injury (as defined
for the purposes of section 2119) to, that individual
or a member of that individual's immediate family; and
``(2) the term `member of that individual's immediate
family' means that individual's parent, child, sibling, or
spouse or intimate partner.
``(c) The court shall at the time of sentencing for an offense
under this section issue an appropriate protection order designed to
protect the victim from further stalking by the convicted person, to
remain in effect until otherwise ordered by the court after notice to
the victim and opportunity for a hearing.''.
(b) Detention Pending Trial.--Section 3156(a)(4)(C) of title 18,
United States Code, is amended by inserting ``, or section 2261A''
after ``117''.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of
chapter 110A of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking
the item relating to section 2261A and inserting the following:
4``2261A. Stalking.''.
Purpose and Summary
The purpose of H.R. 1869, the ``Stalking Prevention and
Victim Protection Act of 1999,'' is 1) to expand the reach of
the Federal stalking statute to prosecute stalkers who are
currently beyond the reach of Federal law enforcement but are
deserving of Federal prosecution, and 2) to better protect
stalking victims by authorizing pretrial detention for alleged
stalkers and mandating the issuance of civil protection orders
against convicted stalkers. The bill would make several
significant changes or additions to current law. First, it
would expand Federal jurisdiction over stalking to reach
stalkers who use the mail or any facility in interstate or
foreign commerce to stalk their victims. Second, H.R. 1869
would require that a Federal court, when sentencing a defendant
convicted of stalking, issue a protection order designed to
protect the victim from further stalking. Third, H.R. 1869
would permit a Federal court to order the detention of an
alleged stalking defendant pending trial in order to assure the
safety of the community or the defendant's appearance at trial.
Background and Need for the Legislation
The first anti-stalking law was passed only nine years ago
in California. Since then, all 50 States have enacted stalking
statutes of one form or another. Congress passed the first
Federal stalking law in 1996 as part of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997. That law states in
pertinent part that:
Whoever travels across a State line or within the
special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the
United States with the intent to injure or harass
another person, and in the course of, or as a result
of, such travel places that person in reasonable fear
of the death of, or serious bodily injury . . . to,
that person or a member of that person's immediate
family . . . shall be punished. . . .'' 18 U.S.C.
Sec. 2261A.
Federal jurisdiction over a stalking crime is triggered
when a stalker travels across a State line with the intent to
injure or harass a person and his conduct places that person in
reasonable fear of death or bodily injury.\1\ The physical
travel requirement precludes the Federal prosecution of
stalkers who use other means of communication to stalk their
victims. Under current law, a stalker is not subject to Federal
for using the mail, the telephone, or Internet to threaten or
harass another person. With the explosive growth of the
Internet and other telecommunications technologies, there is
evidence that cyberstalking--stalking using advanced
communications technologies--is becoming a serious problem. A
1999 Department of Justice report entitled Cyberstalking: A New
Challenge for Law Enforcement and Industry estimated that
``there may be potentially tens or even hundreds of thousands
of victims of recent cyberstalking incidents in the United
States.'' The report defined cyberstalking and explained why it
poses a very real threat to its victims:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Jurisdiction is also triggered when a defendant stalks an
individual within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of
the United States.
Although there is no universally accepted definition
of cyberstalking, the term is used in this report to
refer to the use of the Internet, e-mail, and other
electronic communications devices to stalk another
person. Stalking generally involves harassing or
threatening behavior that an individual engages in
repeatedly, such as following a person, appearing at a
person's home or place of business, making harassing
phone calls, leaving written messages or objects, or
vandalizing a person's property. Most stalking laws
require that the perpetrator make a credible threat of
violence against the victim; others include threats
against the victim's immediate family; and still others
require only that the alleged stalker's course of
conduct constitute an implied threat. While some
conduct involving annoying or menacing behavior might
fall short of illegal stalking, such behavior may be a
prelude to stalking and violence and should be treated
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
seriously.
* * *
Although online harassment and threats can take many
forms, cyberstalking shares important characteristics
with offline stalking. Many stalkers--online or off--
are motivated by a desire to exert control over their
victims and engage in similar types of behavior to
accomplish this end.
* * *
The fact that cyberstalking does not involve physical
contact may create the misperception that it is more
benign than physical stalking. This is not necessarily
true . . . Finally, as with physical stalking, online
harassment and threats may be a prelude to more serious
behavior, including physical violence.
The Subcommittee on Crime heard testimony on the increasing
incidence of cyberstalking and how it can escalate to physical
stalking and violence. H.R. 1869 would be the first amendment
to the Federal stalking statute since its enactment in 1996 and
would help Federal prosecutors respond to predatory stalking
behavior that is presently beyond their reach, such as
cyberstalking and stalking using the mail and telephone.
H.R. 1869 would also amend the Federal stalking statute to
require that a Federal judge, when sentencing a defendant
convicted of stalking, issue a civil protection order designed
to protect the victim from further stalking by the defendant.
Research has shown that some stalkers remain interested in
their target(s) for years, even after they have been
prosecuted, convicted and incarcerated for stalking. A civil
protection order would permit a Federal court to maintain
jurisdiction over a convicted stalker after the completion of
the sentence imposed for the crime, both to reduce the threat
of future stalking by the defendant and to provide an
enforcement mechanism should the order be violated.
Research has also shown that stalking victims run a higher
risk of being assaulted or even killed immediately after the
criminal justice system intervenes; that is, when the stalker
is arrested. H.R. 1869 seeks to reduce this risk to stalking
victims by permitting a Federal court to order the detention of
an alleged stalker pending trial in order to assure the safety
of the victim and the community as well as the defendant's
appearance at trial.
Hearings
The Subcommittee on Crime held a one day legislative
hearing on H.R. 1869 on September 29, 1999. Testifying on the
bill was Robert Fein, Forensic Psychologist for the National
Threat Assessment Office, U.S. Secret Service; David Beatty,
Director of Public Policy, National Center for Victims of
Crime; and Jayne A. Hitchcock, a victim of stalking.
Committee Consideration
On October 13, 1999, the Subcommittee on Crime met in open
session and ordered favorably reported the bill H.R. 1869 with
one amendment by voice vote, a quorum being present. On
November 2, 1999, the committee met in open session and ordered
reported favorably the bill H.R. 1869 with one amendment in the
nature of a substitute by voice vote, a quorum being present.
Vote of the Committee
Mr. McCollum offered an amendment in the nature of a
substitute that made a number of substantive changes to bill.
The amendment was agreed to by voice vote. The chairman moved
to favorably report H.R. 1869, as amended, to the House. The
motion was agreed to by voice vote.
Committee Oversight Findings
In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, the committee reports
that the findings and recommendations of the committee, based
in oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the
descriptive portions of this report.
Committee on Government Reform Findings
No findings or recommendations of the Committee on
Government Reform and Oversight were received as referred to in
clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives.
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
Clause 2(l)(3)(B) of House Rule XI is inapplicable because
this legislation does not provide new budgetary authority or
increased tax expenditures.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(C) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, the committee sets
forth, with respect to the bill H.R. 1869, the following
estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office under section 403 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, November 4, 1999.
Hon. Henry J. Hyde, Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1869, the Stalking
Prevention and Victim Protection Act of 1999.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark
Grabowicz, who can be reached at 226-2860.
Sincerely,
Dan L. Crippen, Director.
H.R. 1869--Stalking Prevention and Victim Protection Act of 1999.
CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1869 would not result
in any significant cost to the Federal Government. Because
enactment of H.R. 1869 could affect direct spending and
receipts, pay-as-you-go procedures would apply to the bill.
However, CBO estimates that any impact on direct spending and
receipts would not be significant. H.R. 1869 contains no
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on
State, local, or tribal governments.
H.R. 1869 would expand the current federal laws against
stalking. As a result, the Federal Government would be able to
pursue cases that it otherwise would not be able to prosecute.
CBO expects that any increase in federal costs for law
enforcement, court proceedings, or prison operations would not
be significant, however, because of the small number of cases
likely to be involved. Any such additional costs would be
subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
Because those prosecuted and convicted under H.R. 1869
could be subject to criminal fines, the Federal Government
might collect additional fines if the bill is enacted.
Collections of such fines are recorded in the budget as
governmental receipts (revenues), which are deposited in the
Crime Victims Fund and spent in subsequent years. CBO expects
that any additional receipts and direct spending would be less
than $500,000 each year.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Mark Grabowicz,
who can be reached at 226-2860. This estimate was approved by
Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget
Analysis.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Pursuant to rule XI, clause 2(l)(4) of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the committee finds the authority for
this legislation in Article I, section 8 of the Constitution.
Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion
Sec. 1. Short Title.
This section provides that the Act may be cited as the
``Stalking Prevention and Victim Protection Act of 1999.''
Sec. 2. Expansion of the prohibition on stalking.
This section would rewrite the Federal stalking statute, 18
U.S.C. section 2261A , and divide the new section 2261A into
three paragraphs. Subparagraph (1) of paragraph (a) of section
2261A would expand jurisdiction over stalking to enable the
prosecution of individuals who are currently beyond the reach
of Federal law enforcement but deserving of Federal
prosecution. Under current law, Federal jurisdiction over a
stalking crime is triggered when a stalker travels across a
State line with the intent to injure or harass an individual
and his or her conduct places that individual in reasonable
fear of death or bodily injury. \2\ As amended by H.R. 1869, a
stalker could also be prosecuted if he or she uses, or causes
another to use, the mail or any facility of interstate or
foreign commerce--such as the Internet--to stalk an individual.
\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Jurisdiction is also triggered when a defendant stalks an
individual within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of
the United States.
\3\ Federal jurisdiction would also be expanded to stalkers who
enter or leave Indian Country or cause another to enter or leave Indian
Country in the course of committing a stalking offense.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subparagraph (2) of paragraph (a) of section 2261A would
explicitly expand Federal jurisdiction over stalking offenses
that occur within Indian country.
Subparagraph (1) of paragraph (b) would define conduct that
constitutes stalking. That is, a person stalks an individual if
he or she engages in conduct with the intent to injure or
harass an individual and that conduct places the individual in
reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury or the death
or serious bodily injury of a member of that individual's
immediate family.
Subparagraph (2) of paragraph (b) would define the term
``member of that individual's immediate family'' to mean that
individual's parent, child, sibling, or spouse or intimate
partner. The material change to current law would be the
inclusion of the term ``intimate partner''--such as a boyfriend
or girlfriend--within the definition. Current law, 18 U.S.C.
section 2266, defines the term ``spouse or intimate partner''
as: a) a spouse, a former spouse, a person who shares a child
in common with the abuser, and a person who cohabits or has
cohabited with the abuser as a spouse; and b) any other person
similarly situated to a spouse who is protected by domestic or
family violence laws of the State in which the injury occurred
or where the victim resides.
Paragraph (c) of section 2261A would require that a Federal
judge, when sentencing a defendant convicted of stalking, issue
a protection order designed to protect the victim from further
stalking by the defendant. Such a protection order would run
concurrently with any ``stay away'' order made a part of the
sentence entered against the defendant following his
conviction, and it would remain in effect until otherwise
ordered by the court after notice to the victim and an
opportunity for a hearing.
Paragraph (b) of H.R. 1869 would amend the term ``crime of
violence,'' as defined by 18 U.S.C. section 3156(4)(C), to
permit a court to order the detention of an alleged stalking
defendant pending trial in order to assure the safety of the
community or the defendant's appearance at trial pursuant to
the pretrial detention statute 18 U.S.C. section 3142(f).
Paragraph (c) of H.R. 1869 would make one clerical
amendment to Chapter 110A of Title 18, United States Code.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change
is proposed is shown in roman):
TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE
PART I--CRIMES
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 110A--DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND STALKING
Sec.
2261. Interstate domestic violence.
[2261A. Interstate stalking.]
2261A. Stalking.
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 2261A. Interstate stalking
[Whoever travels across a State line or within the special
maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States with
the intent to injure or harass another person, and in the
course of, or as a result of, such travel places that person in
reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury (as
defined in section 1365(g)(3) of this title) to, that person or
a member of that person's immediate family (as defined in
section 115 of this title) shall be punished as provided in
section 2261 of this title.]
Sec. 2261A. Stalking
(a) Whoever--
(1) for the purpose of stalking an individual,
travels or causes another to travel in interstate or
foreign commerce, uses or causes another to use the
mail or any facility in interstate or foreign commerce,
or enters or leaves, or causes another to enter or
leave, Indian country; or
(2) within the special maritime and territorial
jurisdiction of the United States or within Indian
country, stalks an individual;
shall be punished as provided in section 2261.
(b) For purposes of this section--
(1) a person stalks an individual if that person
engages in conduct--
(A) with the intent to injure or harass the
individual; and
(B) that places the individual in
reasonable fear of the death of, or serious
bodily injury (as defined for the purposes of
section 2119) to, that individual or a member
of that individual's immediate family; and
(2) the term ``member of that individual's
immediate family'' means that individual's parent,
child, sibling, or spouse or intimate partner.
(c) The court shall at the time of sentencing for an
offense under this section issue an appropriate protection
order designed to protect the victim from further stalking by
the convicted person, to remain in effect until otherwise
ordered by the court after notice to the victim and opportunity
for a hearing.
* * * * * * *
PART II--CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 207--RELEASE AND DETENTION PENDING JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 3156. Definitions
(a) As used in sections 3141-3150 of this chapter--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) the term ``crime of violence'' means--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) any felony under chapter 109A, 110, or
117, or section 2261A; and
* * * * * * *