[Senate Report 110-239]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 527
110th Congress Report
SENATE
1st Session 110-239
======================================================================
PUBLIC CORRUPTION PROSECUTION IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2007
_______
December 10, 2007.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Leahy, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 1946]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the
bill (S. 1946) to help federal prosecutors and investigators
combat public corruption by strengthening and clarifying the
law, reports favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends
that the bill (as amended) do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
I. Background and Purpose of the Public Corruption Prosecution
Improvements Act of 2007.........................................1
II. History of the Bill and Committee Consideration.................10
III. Section-by-Section Summary of the Bill..........................11
IV. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate.......................12
V. Regulatory Impact Evaluation....................................14
VI. Conclusion......................................................14
VII. Changes to Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported...........14
I. Background and Purpose of the Public Corruption Prosecution
Improvements Act of 2007
A. BACKGROUND
Earlier this year, Congress took an important first step in
restoring Americans' faith in their elected officials by
passing long-awaited ethics and lobbying reforms that tighten
restrictions on those who hold public office, as well as those
who seek to lobby officeholders on behalf of private industry.
See Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007, Public
Law No. 110-81, 121 Stat. 735. This positive legislation will
enhance transparency and ethical accountability for Members of
Congress and outside interests. But stamping out official
corruption in all branches and at all levels of government
requires Congress to do more than change its own rules. It
requires Congress to move forward in a bi-partisan fashion to
give law enforcement the resources it needs to effectively
investigate and prosecute public corruption crimes, and to
clarify and strengthen existing laws so that corrupt conduct
can be detected and punished.
Public corruption undermines democracy and good governance
by subverting established processes and reducing
accountability. It also creates negative economic effects by
distorting the playing field for government contracts, reducing
the need for compliance with rules and regulations, and
diminishing the quality of government services. District of
Columbia residents are confronting these negative effects
following the recent arrests of several Department of Tax and
Revenue employees who allegedly bilked District taxpayers out
of more than $40 million in a multi-year fraud scheme. See
Carol D. Leonnig & Dan Keating, D.C. Tax Scandal At $44.3
Million, Analysis Finds, Wash. Post, Dec. 2, 2007, at A1. This
disturbing episode is a reminder that absent appropriate checks
and enforcement, even middle-level government employees can
massively corrupt core government functions, undetected, for
years.
While this degree of brazen corrupt conduct may not always
result in tangible harm to a specific victim, it does result in
a serious societal harm. Public corruption victimizes all
Americans by quietly chipping away at the foundations of our
democracy. Americans' faith in their elected leaders and their
Government has been tested in recent years as several high-
ranking public officials have pleaded guilty or been convicted
of serious and corrosive public corruption offenses. The stain
of corruption has spread to all levels of Government and
affected both major political parties.
The American people have taken notice. Exit polls following
the 2006 mid-term elections revealed that 42 percent of voters
identified ``corruption and ethics'' as ``extremely important
to their vote,'' trumping terrorism, the economy and Iraq.
Corruption Named as Key Issue by Voters in Exit Polls, CNN,
Nov. 8, 2006, http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/07/
election.exitpolls/. They rightly expect Congress to do all it
can to not only police itself, but also to insure that
corruption is stamped out at all levels of government.
B. NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION
Notwithstanding several recent prosecutions of high-profile
public officials, public corruption enforcement generally has
waned since 9/11, because scarce FBI resources have been
shifted away from the pursuit of white collar crime to
counterterrorism. See, e.g., Paul Shukovsky & Daniel Lathrop,
FBI Faces Deep Cuts in Programs to Fight Crimes, Seattle Post-
Intelligencer, Sept. 28, 2007, at A1. A September 2005 report
by Department of Justice Inspector General Glenn Fine found
that, from 2000 to 2004, there was an overall reduction in
public corruption matters handled by the FBI. See Office of the
Inspector Gen., U.S. Dep't of Justice, The External Effects of
the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Reprioritization Efforts
94 (2005), http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/FBI/a0537/
final.pdf. More recently, a study by the nonpartisan research
group Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) found
that the prosecution of all kinds of white collar crimes is
down 27 percent since 2000, and official corruption cases have
dropped in the same period by 14 percent. See Federal
Enforcement Data Show Major Changes in How The Bush
Administration Has Enforced the Law, TRAC Reports, Oct. 15,
2007, http://trac.syr.edu/tracreports/crim/184/.
Man-power and funding shortages have contributed to these
declines, and this trend has real-world consequences: the Wall
Street Journal reported recently that the investigation of a
federal elected official stalled for six months because the
investigating U.S. Attorney's Office could not afford to
replace the prosecutor who was handling the case. Scot J.
Paltrow, Justice Delayed: Budget Crunch Hits U.S. Attorneys'
Offices; Amid Antiterror Focus, Prosecutions Decline, Wall St.
J., Aug. 31, 2007, at A1 (quoting a former Assistant United
States Attorney that ``many offices have chosen not to take on
some difficult cases because they lack the prosecutors and
other resources to pursue them'').\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\At a recent House Judiciary Committee hearing, FBI Director
Mueller noted that the number of ``pending'' public corruption cases
has increased by 49 percent since 2001. Oversight Hearing on the
Federal Bureau of Investigation: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on the
Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2007) (statement of Robert S. Muller, Director,
Federal Bureau of Investigation). But increases in the number of
``pending'' cases--which likely means open investigations--is not
evidence that the level of public corruption enforcement generally is
satisfactory. If anything, the extraordinary increase in pending,
rather than completed, cases cited by Director Mueller suggests that
the only way to sustain an increase in actual prosecutions and
convictions is to restore those resources for public corruption
investigations and prosecutions that have been diverted since 9/11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funding shortfalls in this area of criminal enforcement
should be of particular concern to lawmakers. Public corruption
cases are time and resource intensive, because they often
involve complex schemes hatched by sophisticated criminals who
know how to cover their tracks. Their investigation and
prosecution frequently requires teams of federal agents,
multiple prosecutors, financial analysts, and paralegals, among
other specialists. They often include the use of time-consuming
investigative techniques such as forensic analysis as well as
the execution of search warrants and wiretaps. Efforts to fully
fund anti-corruption units to ensure that investigators and
prosecutors have enough time to put cases together are
imperative because without adequate time and resources, these
cases simply will not be brought.
Even absent the diversion of resources since 9/11, public
corruption enforcement must be a national law enforcement
priority for this Congress, because corrupt public officials
can compromise our national security in alarming ways. Indeed,
the FBI's own web site notes that ``public corruption can have
a direct impact on national security,'' and it is not difficult
to understand this relationship. Cracking Down on Public
Corruption: Why We Take It So Seriously and Why It Matters to
You, FBI, June 20, 2005, http://www.fbi.gov/page2/june05/
obrien062005.htm. A bribed customs official who allows a
terrorist to smuggle a dirty bomb into the country could cause
grave harm to our national security, as could a corrupt
consular officer who illegally supplies U.S. entry visas to
would-be terrorists.\2\ This link between public corruption and
national security must be addressed if Congress is serious
about doing all it can to protect national security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\Unfortunately, these examples are not far-fetched. Earlier this
year, an Iranian national pleaded guilty in federal court in
Washington, D.C. to committing visa fraud at the U.S. Consulate in
Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The fraud, which was perpetrated with the
assistance of a consular employee, resulted in at least 25 Iranian
males illegally entering the U.S. with seemingly legitimate U.S. visas.
See Factual Basis for Plea, United States v. Shajirat, Crim. No. 1:04-
cr-0015-RMU-2 (D.D.C. Jan. 16, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corruption cases are also very difficult to prove, so
Congress must speak with absolute clarity in those statutes
that criminalize corrupt conduct by Government employees and
officials. Those who agree to sell their office for personal
gain through a bribery scheme, or to use their office to extort
money from private citizens, know how to recognize and exploit
ambiguities in the law that have been created by unexpected
court decisions or by creative end-runs around the anti-
corruption laws unforeseen by the policy makers who originally
passed those laws. Just as Congress recently shored up its
ethics rules to leave no doubt as to the obvious impropriety of
taking excessive gifts from outside interests, it is crucial
that Congress shore up the criminal law to close loopholes and
resolve legal ambiguities that may allow corrupt actors to
evade or defeat prosecution.
C. LEGAL PROVISIONS AND LEGISLATIVE INTENT
The Public Corruption Prosecution Improvements Act of 2007
responds directly and sensibly to these needs by giving
prosecutors more time, resources, and legal tools to detect and
prosecute public corruption. It creates no new criminal
offenses, but instead tightens and clarifies existing laws to
give public officials fair notice of the line between ethical
breaches and criminal acts.
The Committee emphasizes that this bi-partisan legislation
is directed at no particular political party or public
official, as both parties have suffered through embarrassing
breaches by some of their elected officials, and none of the
bill's provisions may be applied retroactively to on-going
prosecutions. Instead, this is a targeted bill directed at
those in any branch of government who would use their public
office to line their pockets at the expense of the American
public.
The bill's seventeen provisions can be divided in three
general categories as follows.
1. More time and resources for public corruption investigations and
prosecutions
The bill extends the statute of limitations from five to
six years for three of the most serious public corruption
offenses: bribery, extortion by a public official, and public
sector honest services fraud. As noted, public corruption cases
are among the most difficult and time-consuming cases to
investigate and prosecute. A September 2005 Department of
Justice Inspector General's Report noted that ``public
corruption investigations often require difficult, time-
consuming source development [and] take longer to develop than
other public integrity cases * * * due to the complex and
sensitive nature of the investigations.'' See Office of the
Inspector Gen., U.S. Dep't of Justice, at 94. Bank fraud,
arson, and passport fraud, among other offenses, all have ten-
year statutes of limitations. Public corruption offenses cut to
the heart of our democracy, and a more modest increase to the
statute of limitations is a reasonable step to help corruption
investigators and prosecutors do their jobs.
Public corruption investigations are not only time-
consuming, they are also expensive. In response to the shift of
resources away from corruption and toward counterterrorism in
recent years, the bill also provides $25 million per year for
fiscal years 2008-2011 for FBI and Department of Justice
efforts to combat official corruption. This money will ensure
that federal investigators and prosecutors have the resources
they need to more effectively root out official corruption at
all levels of government. This modest increase in funding would
be less than the alleged loss to taxpayers in just one recent
public corruption prosecution in the District of Columbia.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\The investigation is on-going, but the expected loss from the
alleged D.C. Department of Tax and Revenue fraud scheme may be as high
as $44 million. See Leonnig & Keating, supra, at A1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Legislative fixes to strengthen and clarify existing statutes
The bill also contains a series of legislative fixes to
improve the clarity and enhance the effectiveness of existing
federal statutes. These improvements will cost nothing to
implement, but they will lead to greater deterrence and more
effective prosecutions by clarifying the law and by closing
existing loopholes that thwart congressional intent.
a. Venue in federal cases
The first set of improvements relate to venue in federal
cases--the district or districts where federal prosecutions may
be brought. The bill broadens the part of the general venue
statute--18 U.S.C. Sec. 3237(a)--that governs venue in mail
fraud cases, among other so-called ``continuing'' offenses that
may be carried out in more than one district. The bill would
permit venue to lie in any district in which an act in
furtherance of the offense is committed. It is designed to
address situations where the bulk of the criminal conduct takes
place in one district, but the required mailing to facilitate
that scheme happens to occur in another. For example, if a
fraud scheme is hatched and carried out by a public official
from his Washington, D.C. office, but the mailing in
furtherance of that scheme happens to be dropped in a mailbox
near the public official's home in Bethesda, Maryland, venue
should be able to lie in the District of Columbia, because the
principle acts in furtherance of the scheme took place in the
District. Under current law, the case could only be brought in
Maryland. The intent of this provision is to expand venue to
include districts where any part of the offense occurred as
well as the district where the actual mailing took place.
The bill also includes a common-sense extension of venue in
obstruction of justice and perjury prosecutions to include not
only the district where the conduct constituting the offense
took place, but also the district where the proceeding that the
defendant intended to obstruct or affect took place. The
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 already expanded venue in precisely
this way for certain obstruction prosecutions, including 18
U.S.C. Sec. 1512 (witness tampering). See Pub. L. 107-204, 116
Stat. 745. This bill simply applies this extension to the other
obstruction-related statutes in the obstruction of justice
chapter of the Federal Criminal Code. The same logic that led
Congress to expand venue in the obstruction context applies
with equal force to perjury prosecutions.
b. Clarifications to bribery, gratuities, and mail/wire
fraud statutes
The second set of improvements relates to the federal
bribery, gratuities, and general fraud statutes. See 18 U.S.C.
Sec. Sec. 201, 1341 and 1343.
The bill reverses the Supreme Court's holding in United
States v. Sun-Diamond Growers, 526 U.S. 398 (1999), which
severely restricted the application of the illegal gratuities
statute. Contrary to the understandings of every circuit court
to have considered the issue, the Supreme Court in Sun-Diamond
imposed a new element to the federal gratuities statute,
requiring the government to prove a ``link'' between the
gratuity and an official act. This additional element makes the
statute nearly impossible to differentiate from the federal
bribery statute, which also requires a link between corrupt
conduct and a specific act. In practice, the nexus requirement
means that a spectrum of cases that fall short of a bribe but
plainly involve corrupt conduct may not now be charged as
gratuities absent a demonstrable link between the payment and
specific official action.\4\ Yet Congress plainly intended the
gratuities statute to capture a far broader range of conduct
than the bribery statute, because gratuities is a two-year
offense while the statutory maximum penalty for bribery is
fifteen years. In the wake of Sun-Diamond, the federal
gratuities statute is rarely invoked. In light of the nexus
requirement, prosecutors have an incentive to charge a bribe in
every case that they can charge, as the burdens of proof for
the two offenses are essentially the same.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\As one legal commentator has observed: ``If [the Sun-Diamond
Court's requirement of a ``link'' in gratuities cases] sounds like the
crime of bribery, that is because it is. The Court has essentially
eliminated the separate crime of unlawful gratuity and turned it into a
lesser included offense of bribery.'' George D. Brown, Putting
Watergate Behind Us--Salinas, Sun-Diamond, and Two Views of the
Anticorruption Model, 74 Tulane L. Rev. 747, 774 (2000).
\5\The Sun-Diamond nexus requirement can lead to perverse results.
For example, under current law, a private citizen may keep a public
official on retainer by making substantial periodic payments to the
official so long as there is an understanding that the money is not
intended to influence any specific act, but is instead intended to
build a reservoir of goodwill in the event that matters arise that
would benefit the private interest. While these payments may run afoul
of the gift rules, they are not actionable bribes or gratuities absent
a provable ``link.'' Such payments would be gratuities under this bill
so long as they are made because of the person's public office, which
is precisely what the law provided before Sun-Diamond. See United
States v. Bustamante, 45 F.3d 933, 940 (5th Cir. 1995) (``[I]t is
sufficient for the government to show that the defendant was given the
gratuity simply because he held public office.''); United States v.
Evans, 572 F.2d 455, 480 (5th Cir. 1978) (``[I]t is not necessary that
the official actually engage in identifiable conduct or misconduct nor
that any specific quid pro quo be contemplated by the parties nor even
that the official actually be capable of providing some official act as
quid pro quo at the time [because] [t]he purpose of the[] [bribery and
conflict of interest] statutes is to reach any situation in which the
judgment of a government agent might be clouded because of payments or
gifts made to him by reason of his position.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bill would return the state of the law with regard to
gratuities as it existed before 1999 by including within their
statutory definition those benefits given to a public official
``for or because of'' that official's position. This will allow
the statute to reach its intended range of corrupt conduct,
including benefits flowing to public officials designed to
curry favor for non-specified future acts or to build a
reservoir of goodwill.
To foreclose unrestrained prosecutorial discretion in this
sensitive area in the law, however, the bill also provides an
additional protection that was not included in the original
gratuities statute, and that responds to concerns that
contributed to the Sun-Diamond Court's decision to restrict the
reach of the statute. Specifically, the bill creates a safe
harbor for Government officials who accept things of value
pursuant to applicable rule or regulation. This carve-out
responds to the examples Justice Scalia set out in Sun-Diamond
of de minimis gifts that, as the law stood in 1999, could have
triggered the gratuities statute, by exempting from prosecution
for gratuities all benefits accepted by public officials that
are permitted by rules or regulations.\6\ This new provision
squarely addresses Justice Scalia's parade of horribles in Sun-
Diamond by constraining prosecutorial discretion in cases where
federal prosecution would clearly be inappropriate.\7\ See,
e.g., 5 CFR Sec. 2635.204(a) (permitting government employees
to accept gifts valued at $20 or less, such as a baseball cap);
5 CFR Sec. 2635.204(j) (permitting the President or Vice
President to accept any gift not intended to influence official
action, such as a replica sports jersey).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\This safe harbor is intended to include only duly enacted
federal regulations and duly enacted Rules of the House of
Representatives and the United States Senate, see, e.g., Standing Rules
of the Senate, S. Doc. No. 110-9 (2007), and is not intended to include
other operating procedures and policies established by individual
offices, departments, or agencies of the Government.
\7\The Committee's action does not bring campaign contributions
within the reach of the federal gratuities statute. By the very terms
of the statute, campaign contributions cannot be charged as gratuities
because, unlike bribes, gratuities may only be charged if they are
given ``personally'' to the public officials, while campaign
contributions by definition are given to a separate entity. See 18
U.S.C. Sec. 201(c)(1)(B). Campaign contributions can theoretically be
charged as bribes, which need not be paid directly to the public
official; but the bill in no way disturbs well-settled Supreme Court
precedent that an explicit quid-pro-quo agreement is required in order
for a campaign contribution to be charged as a bribe, even if the
campaign contribution is itself unlawful. See McCormick v. United
States, 500 U.S. 257, 272-74 (1991). Moreover, campaign contributions
are explicitly permitted by government rules and regulations, see,
e.g., Standing Rules of the Senate, Rule XXXV(1)(c)(2), and the
gratuities statute as modified by this bill would not permit
prosecution of anything allowed by rules and regulations, including
campaign contributions. The Committee recognizes that campaign
contributions are an essential component of our democracy, and this
bill is in no way intended to restrict or criminalize this activity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bill also clarifies the definition of what it means for
a public official to engage in an ``official act,'' for
purposes of the federal bribery and gratuities statutes. The
need for clarification arose most recently in the D.C.
Circuit's decision in Valdes v. United States, 475 F.3d 1319
(D.C. Cir. 2007) (en banc). In that case, a fractured court
sitting en banc held that, when a D.C. police detective used a
police computer to search a law enforcement database for
information on particular individuals in exchange for several
secret cash payments, he could not be convicted of bribery or
gratuities because no official act was involved.\8\ The court
held that his actions did not have the requisite degree of
formality to fall within the definition of an ``official act''
for purposes of bribery or gratuities statutes. This cramped
re-formulation of the ``official acts'' standard is at odds
with the legislative history of the bribery statute. See Brief
of Appellee at 16-25, United States v. Valdes, 475 F.3d 1319
(D.C. Cir. 2007) (No. 03-3066) (detailing legislative history
of the federal bribery statute). As the dissenting judges
observed, this interpretation ``effects a judicial
contraction'' of the ``official acts'' standard and will
``undermine the prosecution of public corruption.'' Id. at
1333, 1346 (Garland, J., dissenting).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\One commentator recently observed that ``[t]o permit public
officials to use their positions of public trust to line their pockets
with cash and escape prosecution under the anti-gratuities statute
because the action fails to meet some vague degree of formality makes a
mockery out of the law's attempt to punish corruption.'' Tara Malloy,
Corrupt Officials Shouldn't Escape Through a Loophole in the Gratuities
Law, Legal Times, Nov. 12, 2007, at 58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To address this overly-narrow conception of official
action, the bill explicitly adopts the tried-and-true language
from the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Birdsall,
233 U.S. 223 (1914), defining ``official act,'' and thereby
makes clear that ``[e]very action that is within the range of
official duty comes within the purview of the bribery
statute.'' Id. at 30. The D.C. Circuit's hyper-technical
reading of the ``official acts'' standard unnecessarily
disrupts uniformity in the law, and undermines fair notice to
public officials that they may not legally accept secret
benefits from private interests in return for any action within
the range of their official duties.
The bill also closes a potential loophole by clarifying
bribery law in cases where there is an on-going stream of
financial benefits flowing from a private source to a public
official. In such cases, it may be impossible to establish a
one-to-one link between a specific payment and a specific
official act. No circuit presently requires such a one-to-one
showing, but to avoid confusion and unnecessary litigation,\9\
the bill clarifies that a corrupt payment can be made to
influence more than one official act, and, to the same end,
that a series of such payments may be made to influence a
public official in performing a series of official acts.\10\
See United States v. Gamin, No. 03-1448-cr, slip op. (2d Cir.
Dec. 4, 2007) (holding that, in the bribery context, the
government does not have to tie payments to specific acts but
instead can prove that ``the favors and gifts flowing to a
public official are in exchange for a pattern of official
actions favorable to the donor.''); United States v. Quinn, 359
F.3d 666, 673 (4th Cir. 2004) (``The quid pro quo requirement
is satisfied so long as the evidence shows a course of conduct
of favors and gifts flowing to a public official in exchange
for a pattern of official actions favorable to the donor.'').
This clarification is intended to codify this basic
understanding of ``course of conduct'' bribery. Congress should
leave no doubt that a bribery charge cannot be defeated merely
because the government cannot match up each specific payment in
a series with specific official acts.\11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\One recent example of such litigation arose in the 2003
prosecution and conviction of former Bridgeport, Connecticut mayor
Joseph P. Ganim. During his recent appeal, Mr. Ganim argued that this
bribery conviction should be overturned because the Government was
required to link each alleged benefit to a specific act that he
performed. The Second Circuit rejected this argument, and held that,
``bribery can be accomplished through on ongoing course of conduct, so
long as evidence shows that the favors and gifts flowing to a public
official are in exchange for a pattern of official actions favorable to
the donor.''). United States v. Gamin, No. 03-1448-cr, slip op. at 24-
26 (2d Cir. Dec. 4, 2007).
\10\The bill makes this same clarification to the statute governing
federal prosecution of state and local bribery, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 666, and
it lowers the transactional threshold for section 666 bribery
prosecutions from $5,000 to $1,000.
\11\There are other statutes in the Federal Criminal Code that use
the terms ``thing of value'' and ``official act.'' The Committee's
decision to clarify how those terms are used in 18 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 201
and 666 should not be viewed as an implicit congressional judgment
about the use of these terms elsewhere in the Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the bill broadens coverage of the mail and wire
fraud statutes, which may be used in tandem with other statutes
to prosecute public corruption. The term ``money or property''
has been interpreted by courts to broadly include a variety of
benefits, including intangible rights; but the Supreme Court in
United States v. Cleveland, 531 U.S. 12 (2000), held that state
licenses to operate video poker machines were not ``property''
within the meaning of the mail fraud statute. The bill would
reverse the Supreme Court's holding in Cleveland. As many
circuit courts held before Cleveland was decided, licenses,
permits and other intangible rights have value to the issuing
authority, and, assuming a mailing or a wire, fraudulent
deprivation of these rights should be chargeable as federal
crimes.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\As one circuit court noted before Cleveland, ``the government's
interest here is not simply that of a regulator, but rather that of a
dispenser of valuable property in which the licensee has
constitutionally protected property interests and which the government
may enjoin upon misuse. We do not believe that Congress, in enacting
the mail fraud statute, intended its reach to be dependent on
artificial constructs and fleeting distinctions.'' United States v.
Martinez, 905 F.2d 709 (3d Cir. 1990), overruled by Cleveland v. United
States, 531 U.S. 12 (2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Technical fixes and increased statutory maximum sentences
The bill also contains a series of long-needed technical
fixes to select statutes, as well as targeted increases in
statutory maximum penalties for statutes used in public
corruption cases. For example, the bill amends the federal
theft statute--18 U.S.C. Sec. 641--to bring within its purview
the District of Columbia government and its agencies. This
change is long overdue in view of the District's unique status,
and it comports with the overarching statutory scheme because
the District is already included in the federal bribery statute
(18 U.S.C. Sec. 201) and the statute governing theft and
bribery from programs receiving federal funds (18 U.S.C.
Sec. 666). The need for this fix is acute: under current law,
massive thefts of District of Columbia funds--such as the
recent D.C. Tax and Revenue allegations of a $44 million
fraud--cannot be prosecuted on a federal theft theory.
Similarly, the bill adds the crimes of federal theft, and
theft and bribery from programs receiving federal funds, as
predicates for federal wire taps and as predicates under the
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.
These are serious offenses, on par with other offenses that
already serve as wiretap and RICO predicates.
The bill also increases the maximum penalties for certain
public corruption related offenses.\13\ These increases reflect
the Committee's view of the serious and corrosive nature of
these crimes, and they harmonize the punishment for these
public corruption-related offenses with similar statutes.
Increasing penalties in appropriate cases sends a message to
would-be criminals and to the public that there will be severe
consequences for breaching the public trust. The Committee
notes, however, that, aside from any changes resulting from the
limited review called for in Section 17 of the bill, it does
not intend for the increases in statutory maximum sentences to
trigger recommendations by the Sentencing Commission to
increase the base offense levels for these crimes. Rather, the
statutory increases in the bill are intended to give additional
sentencing latitude for egregious cases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\One section for which the bill increases the maximum sentence
is 18 U.S.C. Sec. 600, which targets promises of employment for
political activity. The Committee notes that this statute does not
reach the routine practice of offering jobs as appropriate to those who
assisted campaigns; rather it reaches only situations in which there
was an explicit quid pro quo agreement in advance to give employment in
exchange for political activity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This bi-partisan bill is supported by the Department of
Justice and by a wide array of public interest groups that have
long advocated for vigorous enforcement of our fraud and public
corruption laws, including the Campaign Legal Center, Common
Cause, Democracy 21, the League of Women Voters, Public
Citizen, and U.S. PIRG.
II. History of the Bill and Committee Consideration
A. INTRODUCTION OF THE BILL
Chairman Leahy introduced S. 1946, the Public Corruption
Prosecution Improvements Act of 2007, on August 3, 2007, joined
by Senator Cornyn as an original cosponsor. Since the bill's
introduction, Senator Sessions has joined on as a cosponsor.
The bill was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
B. COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
The bill was considered by the Committee on the Judiciary
on November 1, 2007. Chairman Leahy offered a complete
substitute amendment which was accepted by unanimous consent.
Senator Specter offered two amendments. The first amendment
would have explicitly stated that campaign contributions may
not be charged as gratuities. This amendment was rejected on a
rollcall vote. The vote record is as follows:
Tally: 6 Yeas, 12 Nays, 1 Pass.
Yeas (6) Nays (12) Pass (1)
Cardin (D-MD) Biden (D-DE) Coburn (R-OK)
Hatch (R-UT) Brownback (R-KS)
Kyl (R-AZ) Cornyn (R-TX)
Graham (R-SC) Durbin (D-IL)
Specter (R-PA) Feingold (D-WI)
Whitehouse (D-RI) Feinstein (D-CA)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Grassley (R-IA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Senator Specter offered an amendment to impose a
``knowingly and corruptly'' scienter requirement on the federal
gratuities statute. The amendment was rejected on a rollcall
vote. The vote record is as follows:
Tally: 2 Yeas, 14 Nays, 3 Passes.
Yeas (2) Nays (14) Pass (3)
Specter (R-PA) Biden (D-DE) Coburn (R-OK)
Hatch (R-UT) Brownback (R-KS) Graham (R-SC)
Cardin (D-MD) Kyl (R-AZ)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Grassley (R-IA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
The Committee then voted to report favorably to the Senate
the Public Corruption Prosecution Improvements Act of 2007. The
Committee proceeded by voice vote.
III. Section-by-Section Summary of the Bill
Section 1. Short Title. This section cites the short title
of the bill as the ``Public Corruption Prosecution Improvements
Act of 2007.''
Section 2. Extension of Statute of Limitations for Serious
Public Corruption Offenses. This section extends the statute of
limitations from five to six years for bribery, deprivation of
honest services involving a public official, and extortion by a
public official.
Section 3. Application of Mail and Wire Fraud Statutes to
Licenses and Other Intangible Rights. This section expands
coverage of the mail and wire fraud statutes to include schemes
involving intangible interests such as contract rights,
licenses, permits, trade secrets, franchises, and government
grants
Section 4. Venue for Federal Offenses. This section amends
section 3237 of title 18, which governs venue for offenses
begun in one district and completed in another district, to
clarify that venue exists in any district in which any portion
of the offense is committed, any act in furtherance of the
offense is committed, or in which the offense is completed.
Section 5. Theft or Bribery Concerning Programs Receiving
Federal Financial Assistance. This section modifies section 666
of title 18 concerning theft or bribery from an organization,
government or agency that receives federal financial assistance
by reducing the $5,000 requirement to $1,000 for section 666
bribery offenses, increasing the maximum penalty for all
offenses under this section from 10 years to 15 years, and
clarifying that a ``thing'' of value can refer to a single item
or more than one item.
Section 6. Penalty for Section 641 Violations. This section
increases the maximum term of imprisonment for theft and
embezzlement of federal funds from 10 years to 15 years.
Section 7. Penalty for Section 201(b) Violations. This
section increases the maximum term of imprisonment for bribery
violations from 15 years to 20 years.
Section 8. Increase of Maximum Penalties for Certain Public
Corruption Related Offenses. This section increases the maximum
punishment to 10 years imprisonment for the following crimes:
solicitation of political contributions (section 602); promise
of employment for political activity (section 600); deprivation
of employment for political activity (section 601);
intimidation to secure political contributions (section 606);
solicitation and acceptance of contributions in federal offices
(section 607); and coercion of political activity by federal
employees (section 610).
Section 9. Addition of District of Columbia to Theft of
Public Money Offense. This section amends section 641 of title
18 relating to theft from the government to include the
District of Columbia government and agencies.
Section 10. Additional RICO Predicates. This section adds
section 641 (embezzlement or theft of public money, property,
or records) and section 666 (relating to theft or bribery
concerning programs receiving federal funds), of title 18 as
RICO predicates.
Section 11. Additional Wiretap Predicates. The section
amends 2516(1) of title 18 to add sections 641 (embezzlement or
theft of public money, property or records) and section 666
(relating to theft or bribery concerning programs receiving
federal funds) as predicate offenses for criminal wiretaps.
Section 12. Clarification of Crime of Illegal Gratuities.
This section amends sections 201(c)(1)(A) & (B) of title 18 to
clarify that things of value, given to a public official ``for
or because of'' that official's position and not otherwise
permitted by law or regulation, are illegal under the federal
gratuities statute.
Section 13. Clarification of Definition of ``Official
Act.'' This section changes the definition of ``official act''
in section 201(a)(3) of title 18 to include any conduct that
falls within the range of official duty of the public official.
This section also clarifies that an official act can be a
single act, more than one act, or a course of conduct.
Section 14. Clarification of Course of Conduct Bribery.
This section, in concert with section 13, amends the federal
bribery statute to make clear that a corrupt payment can be
made to influence more than one official act, and, to the same
end, that a series of such payments may be made to influence a
government official in performing a series of official acts.
Section 15. Expanding Venue for Perjury and Obstruction of
Justice Proceedings. This section amends the perjury and
obstruction of justice statutes to expand venue in those
prosecutions not only to the district where the false statement
or obstructive conduct occurs, but also to the district in
which an affected proceeding takes place.
Section 16. Authorization for Additional Personnel to
Investigate and Prosecute Public Corruption Offenses. This
section provides additional funds ($25,000,000 for fiscal years
2008-11) to Offices of Inspectors General and the Justice
Department for the investigation and prosecution of public
corruption offenses. The FBI and the U.S. Attorney's Offices in
recent years have had to divert resources away from criminal
law priorities including fraud and corruption, and into
counterterrorism.
Section 17. Amendment of the Sentencing Guidelines Relating
to Certain Crimes. This section directs the U.S. Sentencing
Commission to consider amending the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines
in light of the other provisions of this bill.
IV. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
November 9, 2007.
Hon. Patrick J. Leahy,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1946, the Public
Corruption Prosecution Improvements Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark
Grabowicz.
Sincerely,
Peter R. Orszag.
Enclosure.
S. 1946--Public Corruption Prosecution Improvements Act
Summary: S. 1946 would broaden the coverage of the current
laws against public corruption and would increase penalties for
such offenses. The legislation would expand the number of
offenses relative to fraud committed by public officials that
could be federally prosecuted. The bill would authorize the
appropriation of $25 million for each of fiscal years 2008
through 2011 mostly for the Department of Justice to
investigate and prosecute violators of the bill's provisions.
Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO
estimates that implementing the bill would cost $100 million
over the 2008-2012 period. S. 1946 could affect direct spending
and receipts, but we estimate that any such effects would not
be significant.
S. 1946 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
and would not affect the budgets of State, local, or tribal
governments.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of S. 1946 is shown in the following table.
For this estimate, CBO assumes that the bill will be enacted by
the end of calendar year 2007. CBO assumes that the amounts
authorized by the bill will be appropriated near the start of
each fiscal year and that outlays will follow the historical
rate of spending for similar activities. The costs of this
legislation fall within budget function 750 (administration of
justice).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of
dollars--
---------------------------------------
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Authorization Level............. 25 25 25 25 0
Estimated Outlays............... 15 25 25 25 10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the costs shown in the table, enacting S.
1946 could increase collections of criminal fines for
violations of the bill's provisions. CBO estimates that any
additional collections would not be significant because of the
relatively small number of additional cases likely to be
affected. Criminal fines are recorded as revenues, deposited in
the Crime Victims Fund, and subsequently spent without further
appropriation.
Intergovernmental and private-sector mandates
S. 1946 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in UMRA and would not affect the budgets of
state, local, or tribal governments.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Mark Grabowicz. Impact
on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Melissa Merrell.
Impact on the Private Sector: Paige Piper/Bach.
Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
V. Regulatory Impact Evaluation
In compliance with rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate, the Committee finds that no significant regulatory
impact will result from the enactment of S. 1946.
VI. Conclusion
The Public Corruption Prosecution Improvements Act of 2007
will provide federal law enforcement critical additional time
and resources to help detect and prosecute corrupt conduct at
all levels of Government. It also amends several federal
statues in sensible, targeted ways to restore the intent of
Congress, and to provide fair notice to public officials of
what the laws provide.
The Committee urges the prompt passage of this important
legislation.
VII. Changes to Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by
S. 1946, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, and existing law in which no
change is proposed is shown in roman):
TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 11--BRIBERY, GRAFT, AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
* * * * * * *
Sec. 201. Bribery of public officials and witnesses
(a) For the purpose of this section--
(1) the term ``public official'' means Member of
Congress, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, either
before or after such official has qualified, or an
officer or employee or person acting for or on behalf
of the United States, or any department, agency or
branch of Government thereof, including the District of
Columbia, in any official function, under or by
authority of any such department, agency, or branch of
Government, or a juror;
(2) the term ``person who has been selected to be a
public official'' means any person who has been
nominated or appointed to be a public official, or has
been officially informed that such person will be so
nominated or appointed; and
(3) the term ``official act'' means any [decision or
action on any question, matter, cause, suit, proceeding
or controversy, which may at any time be pending, or
which may by law be brought before any public official,
in such official's official capacity, or in such
official's place of trust or profit.] action within the
range of official duty, and any decision or action on
any question, matter, cause, suit, proceeding or
controversy, which may at any time be brought before
any public official, in such public official's official
capacity or in such official's place of trust or
profit. An official act can be a single act, more than
one act, or a course of conduct.
(b) Whoever--
(1) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers
or promises [anything of value] any thing or things of
value to any public official or person who has been
selected to be a public official, or offers or promises
any public official or any person who has been selected
to be a public official to give [anything of value] any
thing or things of value to any other person or entity,
with intent--
(A) to influence any official act; or
(B) to influence such public official or
person who has been selected to be a public
official to commit or aid in committing, or
collude in, or allow, any fraud, or make
opportunity for the commission of any fraud, on
the United States; or
(C) to induce such public official or such
person who has been selected to be a public
official to do or omit to do any act in
violation of the lawful duty of such official
or person;
(2) being a public official or person selected to be
a public official, directly or indirectly, corruptly
demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive
or accept [anything of value] any thing or things of
value personally or for any other person or entity, in
return for:
(A) being influenced in the performance of
any official act;
(B) being influenced to commit or aid in
committing, or to collude in, or allow, any
fraud, or make opportunity for the commission
of any fraud, on the United States; or
(C) being induced to do or omit to do any act
in violation of the official duty of such
official or person;
(3) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers,
or promises anything of value to any person, or offers
or promises such person to give [anything of value] any
thing or things of value to any other person or entity,
with intent to influence the testimony under oath or
affirmation of such first-mentioned person as a witness
upon a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, before any
court, any committee of either House or both Houses of
Congress, or any agency, commission, or officer
authorized by the laws of the United States to hear
evidence or take testimony, or with intent to influence
such person to absent himself therefrom;
(4) directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks,
receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or testimony
under oath or affirmation as a witness upon any such
trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in return for
absenting himself therefrom; shall be fined under this
title or not more than three times the monetary
equivalent of the thing of value, whichever is greater,
or imprisoned for not more than [fifteen years] 20
years, or both, and may be disqualified from holding
any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United
States.
(c) Whoever--
(1) [otherwise than as provided by law for the proper
discharge of official duty--] otherwise than as
provided by law for the proper discharge of official
duty, or by rule or regulation--
(A) directly or indirectly gives, offers, or
promises [anything of value] any thing or
things of value to any public official, former
public official, or person selected to be a
public official, for or because of any official
act performed or to be performed by such public
official, former public official, or person
selected to be a public official for or because
of the official's or person's official
position, or for or because of any official act
performed or to be performed by such public
official, former public official, or person
selected to be a public official; or
(B) being a public official, former public
official, or person selected to be a public
official, otherwise than as provided by law for
the proper discharge of official duty, directly
or indirectly demands, seeks, receives,
accepts, or agrees to receive or accept
[anything of value] any thing or things of
value personally [for or because of any
official act performed or to be performed by
such official or person;] for or because of the
official's or person's official position, or
for or because of any official act performed or
to be performed by such official or person;
(2) directly or indirectly, gives, offers, or
promises [anything of value] any thing or things of
value to any person, for or because of the testimony
under oath or affirmation given or to be given by such
person as a witness upon a trial, hearing, or other
proceeding, before any court, any committee of either
House or both Houses of Congress, or any agency,
commission, or officer authorized by the laws of the
United States to hear evidence or take testimony, or
for or because of such person's absence therefrom;
(3) directly or indirectly, demands, seeks, receives,
accepts, or agrees to receive or accept [anything of
value] any thing or things of value personally for or
because of the testimony nder oath or affirmation given
or to be given by such person as a witness upon any
such trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or for or
because of such person's absence therefrom;
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than
two years, or both.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 29--ELECTIONS AND POLITICAL ACTIVITIES
* * * * * * *
Sec. 600. Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity
Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,
position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other
benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by
any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining
any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or
reward for any political activity or for the support of or
opposition to any candidate or any political party in
connection with any general or special election to any
political office, or in connection with any primary election or
political convention or caucus held to select candidates for
any political office, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than [one year] 10 years, or both.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 601. Deprivation of employment or other benefit for political
contribution
(a) Whoever, directly or indirectly, knowingly causes or
attempts to cause any person to make a contribution of a thing
of value (including services) for the benefit of any candidate
or any political party, by means of the denial or deprivation,
or the threat of the denial or deprivation, of--
(1) any employment, position, or work in or for any
agency or other entity of the Government of the United
States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State,
or any compensation or benefit of such employment,
position, or work; or
(2) any payment or benefit of a program of the United
States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State;
if such employment, position, work, compensation, payment, or
benefit is provided for or made possible in whole or in part by
an Act of Congress, shall be fined under this title, or
imprisoned not more than [one year] 10 years, or both.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 602. Solicitation of political contributions
(a) It shall be unlawful for--
(1) a candidate for the Congress;
(2) an individual elected to or serving in the office
of Senator or Representative in, or Delegate or
Resident Commissioner to, the Congress;
(3) an officer or employee of the United States or
any department or agency thereof; or
(4) a person receiving any salary or compensation for
services from money derived from the Treasury of the
United States; to knowingly solicit any contribution
within the meaning of section 301(8) of the Federal
Election Campaign Act of 1971 from any other such
officer, employee, or person. Any person who violates
this section shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than [3 years] 10 years, or both.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 606. Intimidation to secure political contributions
Whoever, being one of the officers or employees of the
United States mentioned in section 602 of this title,
discharges, or promotes, or degrades, or in any manner changes
the official rank or compensation of any other officer or
employee, or promises or threatens so to do, for giving or
withholding or neglecting to make any contribution of money or
other valuable thing for any political purpose, shall be fined
under this title or imprisoned not more than [three years] 10
years, or both.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 607. Place of solicitation
(a) Prohibition.--
(1) In general.--It shall be unlawful for any person
to solicit or receive a donation of money or other
thing of value in connection with a Federal, State, or
local election from a person who is located in a room
or building occupied in the discharge of official
duties by an officer or employee of the United States.
It shall be unlawful for an individual who is an
officer or employee of the Federal Government,
including the President, Vice President, and Members of
Congress, to solicit or receive a donation of money or
other thing of value in connection with a Federal,
State, or local election, while in any room or building
occupied in the discharge of official duties by an
officer or employee of the United States, from any
person.
(2) Penalty.--A person who violates this section
shall be fined not more than $5,000, imprisoned not
more than [3 years] 10 years, or both.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 610. Coercion of political activity
It shall be unlawful for any person to intimidate,
threaten, command, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate,
threaten, command, or coerce, any employee of the Federal
Government as defined in section 7322(1) of title 5, United
States Code, to engage in, or not to engage in, any political
activity, including, but not limited to, voting or refusing to
vote for any candidate or measure in any election, making or
refusing to make any political contribution, or working or
refusing to work on behalf of any candidate. Any person who
violates this section shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than [three years] 10 years, or both.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 31--EMBEZZLEMENT AND THEFT
* * * * * * *
Sec. 666. Theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds
(a) Whoever, if the circumstance described in subsection
(b) of this section exists--
(1) being an agent of an organization, or of a State,
local, or Indian tribal government, or any agency
thereof--
(A) embezzles, steals, obtains by fraud, or
otherwise without authority knowingly converts
to the use of any person other than the
rightful owner or intentionally misapplies,
property that--
(i) is valued at $5,000 or more, and
(ii) is owned by, or is under the
care, custody, or control of such
organization, government, or agency; or
(B) corruptly solicits or demands for the
benefit of any person, or accepts or agrees to
accept, [anything of value] any thing or things
of value from any person, intending to be
influenced or rewarded in connection with any
business, transaction, or series of
transactions of such organization, government,
or agency involving any thing of value of
[$5,000] $1,000 or more; or
(2) corruptly gives, offers, or agrees to give
[anything of value] any thing or things of value to any
person, with intent to influence or reward an agent of
an organization or of a State, local or Indian tribal
government, or any agency thereof, in connection with
any business, transaction, or series of transactions of
such organization, government, or agency involving
anything of value of [$5,000] $1,000 or more;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than [10
years] 15 years, or both.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 641. Public money, property or records
Whoever embezzles, steals, purloins, or knowingly converts
to his use or the use of another, or without authority, sells,
conveys or disposes of any record, voucher, money, or thing of
value of the District of Columbia or the United States or of
any department or agency thereof, or any property made or being
made under contract for the District of Columbia or the United
States or any department or agency thereof; or
Whoever receives, conceals, or retains the same with intent
to convert it to his use or gain, knowing it to have been
embezzled, stolen, purloined or converted--
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than
[ten years] 15 years, or both; but if the value of such
property in the aggregate, combining amounts from all the
counts for which the defendant is convicted in a single case,
does not exceed the sum of $1,000, he shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
The word ``value'' means face, par, or market value, or
cost price, either wholesale or retail, whichever is greater.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 63--MAIL FRAUD
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1341. Frauds and swindles
Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme
or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining [money or property]
money, property, or any other thing of value by means of false
or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, or to
sell, dispose of, loan, exchange, alter, give away, distribute,
supply, or furnish or procure for unlawful use any counterfeit
or spurious coin, obligation, security, or other article, or
anything represented to be or intimated or held out to be such
counterfeit or spurious article, for the purpose of executing
such scheme or artifice or attempting so to do, places in any
post office or authorized depository for mail matter, any
matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by the Postal
Service, or deposits or causes to be deposited any matter or
thing whatever to be sent or delivered by any private or
commercial interstate carrier, or takes or receives therefrom,
any such matter or thing, or knowingly causes to be delivered
by mail or such carrier according to the direction thereon, or
at the place at which it is directed to be delivered by the
person to whom it is addressed, any such matter or thing, shall
be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years,
or both. If the violation affects a financial institution, such
person shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned
not more than 30 years, or both.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1343. Fraud by wire, radio, or television
Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme
or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining [money or property]
money, property, or any other thing of value by means of false
or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises,
transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio,
or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce,
any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the
purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined
under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
If the violation affects a financial institution, such person
shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more
than 30 years, or both.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 79--PERJURY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant
(a)(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(i) [A prosecution under this section] A prosecution
under this chapter or section 1503 may be brought in
the district in which the official proceeding (whether
or not pending or about to be instituted) was intended
to be affected or in the district in which the conduct
constituting the alleged offense occurred.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1624. Venue
A prosecution under this chapter may be brought in the
district in which the oath, declaration, certificate,
verification, or statement under penalty of perjury is made or
in which a proceeding takes place in connection with the oath,
declaration, certificate, verification, or statement.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 95--RACKETEERING
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1956. Laundering of monetary instruments
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) As used in this section--
(1) * * *
(2) * * *
(3) * * *
(4) * * *
(5) * * *
(6) * * *
(7) the term ``specified unlawful activity'' means--
(A) any act or activity constituting an
offense listed in section 1961(1) of this title
except an act which is indictable under
subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31;
(B) with respect to a financial transaction
occurring in whole or in part in the United
States, an offense against a foreign nation
involving--
(i) the manufacture, importation,
sale, or distribution of a controlled
substance (as such term is defined for
the purposes of the Controlled
Substances Act);
(ii) murder, kidnapping, robbery,
extortion, destruction of property by
means of explosive or fire, or a crime
of violence (as defined in section 16);
(iii) fraud, or any scheme or attempt
to defraud, by or against a foreign
bank (as defined in paragraph 7 of
section 1(b) of the International
Banking Act of 1978);
(iv) bribery of a public official, or
the misappropriation, theft, or
embezzlement of public funds by or for
the benefit of a public official;
(v) smuggling or export control
violations involving--
(I) an item controlled on the
United States Munitions List
established under section 38 of
the Arms Export Control Act (22
U.S.C. 2778); or
(II) an item controlled under
regulations under the Export
Administration Regulations (15
C.F.R. Parts 730-774);
(vi) an offense with respect to which
the United States would be obligated by
a multilateral treaty, either to
extradite the alleged offender or to
submit the case for prosecution, if the
offender were found within the
territory of the United States; or
(vii) trafficking in persons, selling
or buying of children, sexual
exploitation of children, or
transporting, recruiting or harboring a
person, including a child, for
commercial sex acts;
(C) any act or acts constituting a continuing
criminal enterprise, as that term is defined in
section 408 of the Controlled Substances Act
(21 U.S.C. 848);
(D) an offense under section 32 (relating to
the destruction of aircraft), section 37
(relating to violence at international
airports), section 115 (relating to
influencing, impeding, or retaliating against a
Federal official by threatening or injuring a
family member), section 152 (relating to
concealment of assets; false oaths and claims;
bribery), section 175c (relating to the variola
virus), section 215 (relating to commissions or
gifts for procuring loans), section 351
(relating to congressional or Cabinet officer
assassination), any of sections 500 through 503
(relating to certain counterfeiting offenses),
section 513 (relating to securities of States
and private entities), section 541 (relating to
goods falsely classified), section 542
(relating to entry of goods by means of false
statements), section 545 (relating to smuggling
goods into the United States), section 549
(relating to removing goods from Customs
custody), section 554 (relating to smuggling
goods from the United States), [section 641
(relating to public money, property, or
records),] section 656 (relating to theft,
embezzlement, or misapplication by bank officer
or employee), section 657 (relating to lending,
credit, and insurance institutions), section
658 (relating to property mortgaged or pledged
to farm credit agencies), [section 666
(relating to theft or bribery concerning
programs receiving Federal funds),] section
793, 794, or 798 (relating to espionage),
section 831 (relating to prohibited
transactions involving nuclear materials),
section 844(f) or (i) (relating to destruction
by explosives or fire of Government property or
property affecting interstate or foreign
commerce), section 875 (relating to interstate
communications), section 922(1) (relating to
the unlawful importation of firearms), section
924(n) (relating to firearms trafficking),
section 956 (relating to conspiracy to kill,
kidnap, maim, or injure certain property in a
foreign country), section 1005 (relating to
fraudulent bank entries), 1006 (relating to
fraudulent Federal credit institution entries),
1007 (relating to fraudulent Federal Deposit
Insurance transactions), 1014 (relating to
fraudulent loan or credit applications),
section 1030 (relating to computer fraud and
abuse), 1032 (relating to concealment of assets
from conservator, receiver, or liquidating
agent of financial institution), section 1111
(relating to murder), section 1114 (relating to
murder of United States law enforcement
officials), section 1116 (relating to murder of
foreign officials, official guests, or
internationally protected persons), section
1201 (relating to kidnapping), section 1203
(relating to hostage taking), section 1361
(relating to willful injury of Government
property), section 1363 (relating to
destruction of property within the special
maritime and territorial jurisdiction), section
1708 (theft from the mail), section 1751
(relating to Presidential assassination),
section 2113 or 2114 (relating to bank and
postal robbery and theft), section 2280
(relating to violence against maritime
navigation), section 2281 (relating to violence
against maritime fixed platforms), section 2319
(relating to copyright infringement), section
2320 (relating to trafficking in counterfeit
goods and services), section 2332 (relating to
terrorist acts abroad against United States
nationals), section 2332a (relating to use of
weapons of mass destruction), section 2332b
(relating to international terrorist acts
transcending national boundaries), section
2332g (relating to missile systems designed to
destroy aircraft), section 2332h (relating to
radiological dispersal devices), section 2339A
or 2339B (relating to providing material
support to terrorists), section 2339C (relating
to financing of terrorism), or section 2339D
(relating to receiving military-type training
from a foreign terrorist organization) of this
title, section 46502 of title 49, United States
Code, a felony violation of the Chemical
Diversion and Trafficking Act of 1988 (relating
to precursor and essential chemicals), section
590 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1590)
(relating to aviation smuggling), section 422
of the Controlled Substances Act (relating to
transportation of drug paraphernalia), section
38(c) (relating to criminal violations) of the
Arms Export Control Act, section 11 (relating
to violations) of the Export Administration Act
of 1979, section 206 (relating to penalties) of
the International Emergency Economic Powers
Act, section 16 (relating to offenses and
punishment) of the Trading with the Enemy Act,
any felony violation of section 15 of the Food
Stamp Act of 1977 [7 U.S.C.A. Sec. 2024]
(relating to food stamp fraud) involving a
quantity of coupons having a value of not less
than $5,000, any violation of section 543(a)(1)
of the Housing Act of 1949 [42 U.S.C.A.
Sec. 1490s(a)(1)] (relating to equity
skimming), any felony violation of the Foreign
Agents Registration Act of 1938, any felony
violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act,
or section 92 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
(42 U.S.C. 2122) (relating to prohibitions
governing atomic weapons)
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 96--RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1961. Definitions
As used in this chapter--
(1) ``racketeering activity'' means (A) any act or
threat involving murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson,
robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter,
or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical
(as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances
Act), which is chargeable under State law and
punishable by imprisonment for more than one year; (B)
any act which is indictable under any of the following
provisions of title 18, United States Code: Section 201
(relating to bribery), section 224 (relating to sports
bribery), sections 471, 472, and 473 (relating to
counterfeiting), section 641 (relating to embezzlement
or theft of public money, property, or records),
section 659 (relating to theft from interstate
shipment) if the act indictable under section 659 is
felonious, section 664 (relating to embezzlement from
pension and welfare funds), section 666 (relating to
theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal
funds), sections 891-894 (relating to extortionate
credit transactions), section 1028 (relating to fraud
and related activity in connection with identification
documents), section 1029 (relating to fraud and related
activity in connection with access devices), section
1084 (relating to the transmission of gambling
information), section 1341 (relating to mail fraud),
section 1343 (relating to wire fraud), section 1344
(relating to financial institution fraud), section 1425
(relating to the procurement of citizenship or
nationalization unlawfully), section 1426 (relating to
the reproduction of naturalization or citizenship
papers), section 1427 (relating to the sale of
naturalization or citizenship papers), sections 1461-
1465 (relating to obscene matter), section 1503
(relating to obstruction of justice), section 1510
(relating to obstruction of criminal investigations),
section 1511 (relating to the obstruction of State or
local law enforcement), section 1512 (relating to
tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant),
section 1513 (relating to retaliating against a
witness, victim, or an informant), section 1542
(relating to false statement in application and use of
passport), section 1543 (relating to forgery or false
use of passport), section 1544 (relating to misuse of
passport), section 1546 (relating to fraud and misuse
of visas, permits, and other documents), sections 1581-
1592 (relating to peonage, slavery, and trafficking in
persons), section 1951 (relating to interference with
commerce, robbery, or extortion), section 1952
(relating to racketeering), section 1953 (relating to
interstate transportation of wagering paraphernalia),
section 1954 (relating to unlawful welfare fund
payments), section 1955 (relating to the prohibition of
illegal gambling businesses), section 1956 (relating to
the laundering of monetary instruments), section 1957
(relating to engaging in monetary transactions in
property derived from specified unlawful activity),
section 1958 (relating to use of interstate commerce
facilities in the commission of murder-for-hire),
section 1960 (relating to illegal money transmitters),
sections 2251, 2251A, 2252, and 2260 (relating to
sexual exploitation of children), sections 2312 and
2313 (relating to interstate transportation of stolen
motor vehicles), sections 2314 and 2315 (relating to
interstate transportation of stolen property), section
2318 (relating to trafficking in counterfeit labels for
phone records, computer programs or computer program
documentation or packaging and copies of motion
pictures or other audiovisual works), section 2319
(relating to criminal infringement of a copyright),
section 2319A (relating to unauthorized fixation of and
trafficking in sound recordings and music videos of
live musical performances), section 2320 (relating to
trafficking in goods or services bearing counterfeit
marks), section 2321 (relating to trafficking in
certain motor vehicles or motor vehicle parts),
sections 2341-2346 (relating to trafficking in
contraband cigarettes), sections 2421-24 (relating to
white slave traffic), sections 175-178 (relating to
biological weapons), sections 229-229F (relating to
chemical weapons), section 831 (relating to nuclear
materials), (C) any act which is indictable under title
29, United States Code, section 186 (dealing with
restrictions on payments and loans to labor
organizations) or section 501(c) (relating to
embezzlement from union funds), (D) any offense
involving fraud connected with a case under title 11
(except a case under section 157 of this title), fraud
in the sale of securities, or the felonious
manufacture, importation, receiving, concealment,
buying, selling, or otherwise dealing in a controlled
substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102
of the Controlled Substances Act), punishable under any
law of the United States, (E) any act which is
indictable under the Currency and Foreign Transactions
Reporting Act, (F) any act which is indictable under
the Immigration and Nationality Act, section 274
(relating to bringing in and harboring certain aliens),
section 277 (relating to aiding or assisting certain
aliens to enter the United States), or section 278
(relating to importation of alien for immoral purpose)
if the act indictable under such section of such Act
was committed for the purpose of financial gain, or (G)
any act that is indictable under any provision listed
in section 2332b(g)(5)(B);
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 119--WIRE AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS INTERCEPTION AND
INTERCEPTION OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2516. Authorization for interception of wire, oral, or electronic
communications
(1) The Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General,
Associate Attorney General, or any Assistant Attorney General,
any acting Assistant Attorney General, or any Deputy Assistant
Attorney General or acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General in
the Criminal Division or National Security Division specially
designated by the Attorney General, may authorize an
application to a Federal judge of competent jurisdiction for,
and such judge may grant in conformity with section 2518 of
this chapter an order authorizing or approving the interception
of wire or oral communications by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, or a Federal agency having responsibility for
the investigation of the offense as to which the application is
made, when such interception may provide or has provided
evidence of--
(a) any offense punishable by death or by
imprisonment for more than one year under sections 2122
and 2274 through 2277 of title 42 of the United States
Code (relating to the enforcement of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954), section 2284 of title 42 of the United
States Code (relating to sabotage of nuclear facilities
or fuel), or under the following chapters of this
title: chapter 10 (relating to biological weapons)
chapter 37 (relating to espionage), chapter 55
(relating to kidnapping), chapter 90 (relating to
protection of trade secrets), chapter 105 (relating to
sabotage), chapter 115 (relating to treason), chapter
102 (relating to riots), chapter 65 (relating to
malicious mischief), chapter 111 (relating to
destruction of vessels), or chapter 81 (relating to
piracy);
(b) a violation of section 186 or section 501(c) of
title 29, United States Code (dealing with restrictions
on payments and loans to labor organizations), or any
offense which involves murder, kidnapping, robbery, or
extortion, and which is punishable under this title;
(c) any offense which is punishable under the
following sections of this title: section 37 (relating
to violence at international airports), section 43
(relating to animal enterprise terrorism), section 81
(arson within special maritime and territorial
jurisdiction), section 201 (bribery of public officials
and witnesses), section 215 (relating to bribery of
bank officials), section 224 (bribery in sporting
contests), section 641 (relating to embezzlement or
theft of public money, property, or records), section
666 (relating to theft or bribery concerning programs
receiving Federal funds), subsection (d), (e), (f),
(g), (h), or (i) of section 844 (unlawful use of
explosives), section 1032 (relating to concealment of
assets), section 1084 (transmission of wagering
information), section 751 (relating to escape), section
832 (relating to nuclear and weapons of mass
destruction threats), section 842 (relating to
explosive materials), section 930 (relating to
possession of weapons in Federal facilities), section
1014 (relating to loans and credit applications
generally; renewals and discounts), section 1114
(relating to officers and employees of the United
States), section 1116 (relating to protection of
foreign officials), sections 1503, 1512, and 1513
(influencing or injuring an officer, juror, or witness
generally), section 1510 (obstruction of criminal
investigations), section 1511 (obstruction of State or
local law enforcement), section 1591 (sex trafficking
of children by force, fraud, or coercion), section 1751
(Presidential and Presidential staff assassination,
kidnapping, and assault), section 1951 (interference
with commerce by threats or violence), section 1952
(interstate and foreign travel or transportation in aid
of racketeering enterprises), section 1958 (relating to
use of interstate commerce facilities in the commission
of murder for hire), section 1959 (relating to violent
crimes in aid of racketeering activity), section 1954
(offer, acceptance, or solicitation to influence
operations of employee benefit plan), section 1955
(prohibition of business enterprises of gambling),
section 1956 (laundering of monetary instruments),
section 1957 (relating to engaging in monetary
transactions in property derived from specified
unlawful activity), section 659 (theft from interstate
shipment), section 664 (embezzlement from pension and
welfare funds), section 1343 (fraud by wire, radio, or
television), section 1344 (relating to bank fraud),
section 1992 (relating to terrorist attacks against
mass transportation), sections 2251 and 2252 (sexual
exploitation of children), section 2251A (selling or
buying of children), section 2252A (relating to
material constituting or containing child pornography),
section 1466A (relating to child obscenity), section
2260 (production of sexually explicit depictions of a
minor for importation into the United States), sections
2421, 2422, 2423, and 2425 (relating to transportation
for illegal sexual activity and related crimes),
sections 2312, 2313, 2314, and 2315 (interstate
transportation of stolen property), section 2321
(relating to trafficking in certain motor vehicles or
motor vehicle parts), section 2340A (relating to
torture), section 1203 (relating to hostage taking),
section 1029 (relating to fraud and related activity in
connection with access devices), section 3146 (relating
to penalty for failure to appear), section 3521(b)(3)
(relating to witness relocation and assistance),
section 32 (relating to destruction of aircraft or
aircraft facilities), section 38 (relating to aircraft
parts fraud), section 1963 (violations with respect to
racketeer influenced and corrupt organizations),
section 115 (relating to threatening or retaliating
against a Federal official), section 1341 (relating to
mail fraud), a felony violation of section 1030
(relating to computer fraud and abuse), section 351
(violations with respect to congressional, Cabinet, or
Supreme Court assassinations, kidnapping, and assault),
section 831 (relating to prohibited transactions
involving nuclear materials), section 33 (relating to
destruction of motor vehicles or motor vehicle
facilities), section 175 (relating to biological
weapons), section 175c (relating to variola virus),
section 956 (conspiracy to harm persons or property
overseas), a felony violation of section 1028 (relating
to production of false identification documentation),
section 1425 (relating to the procurement of
citizenship or nationalization unlawfully), section
1426 (relating to the reproduction of naturalization or
citizenship papers), section 1427 (relating to the sale
of naturalization or citizenship papers), section 1541
(relating to passport issuance without authority),
section 1542 (relating to false statements in passport
applications), section 1543 (relating to forgery or
false use of passports), section 1544 (relating to
misuse of passports), or section 1546 (relating to
fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other
documents);
(d) any offense involving counterfeiting punishable
under section 471, 472, or 473 of this title;
(e) any offense involving fraud connected with a case
under title 11 or the manufacture, importation,
receiving, concealment, buying, selling, or otherwise
dealing in narcotic drugs, marihuana, or other
dangerous drugs, punishable under any law of the United
States;
(f) any offense including extortionate credit
transactions under sections 892, 893, or 894 of this
title;
(g) a violation of section 5322 of title 31, United
States Code (dealing with the reporting of currency
transactions), or section 5324 of title 31, United
States Code (relating to structuring transactions to
evade reporting requirement prohibited);
(h) any felony violation of sections 2511 and 2512
(relating to interception and disclosure of certain
communications and to certain intercepting devices) of
this title;
(i) any felony violation of chapter 71 (relating to
obscenity) of this title;
(j) any violation of section 60123(b) (relating to
destruction of a natural gas pipeline), section 46502
(relating to aircraft piracy), the second sentence of
section 46504 (relating to assault on a flight crew
with dangerous weapon), or section 46505(b)(3) or (c)
(relating to explosive or incendiary devices, or
endangerment of human life, by means of weapons on
aircraft) of title 49;
(k) any criminal violation of section 2778 of title
22 (relating to the Arms Export Control Act);
(l) the location of any fugitive from justice from an
offense described in this section;
(m) a violation of section 274, 277, or 278 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324, 1327,
or 1328) (relating to the smuggling of aliens);
(n) any felony violation of sections 922 and 924 of
title 18, United States Code (relating to firearms);
(o) any violation of section 5861 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to firearms);
(p) a felony violation of section 1028 (relating to
production of false identification documents), section
1542 (relating to false statements in passport
applications), section 1546 (relating to fraud and
misuse of visas, permits, and other documents, section
1028A (relating to aggravated identity theft)) of this
title or a violation of section 274, 277, or 278 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (relating to the
smuggling of aliens); or
(q) any criminal violation of section 229 (relating
to chemical weapons): or sections 2332, 2332a, 2332b,
2332d, 2332f, 2332g, 2332h, 2339, 2339A, 2339B, 2339C,
or 2339D of this title (relating to terrorism);
(r) any criminal violation of section 1 (relating to
illegal restraints of trade or commerce), 2 (relating
to illegal monopolizing of trade or commerce), or 3
(relating to illegal restraints of trade or commerce in
territories or the District of Columbia) of the Sherman
Act (15 U.S.C. 1, 2, 3); or
(s) any conspiracy to commit any offense described in
any subparagraph of this paragraph.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 211--JURISDICTION AND VENUE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 3237. [Offenses begun in one district and completed in another]
Offense taking place in more than one district
(a) Except as otherwise expressly provided by enactment of
Congress, any offense against the United States begun in one
district and completed in another, or committed in more than
one district, may be inquired of and prosecuted in any district
in which such offense was begun, continued, or completed.
Any offense involving the use of the mails, transportation
in interstate or foreign commerce, or the importation of an
object or person into the United States is a continuing offense
and, except as otherwise expressly provided by enactment of
Congress, may be inquired of and prosecuted in any district
from, through, or into which such commerce, mail matter, or
imported object or person moves or in any district in which an
act in furtherance of the offense is committed.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 213--LIMITATIONS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 3299A. Corruption offenses
Unless an indictment is returned or the information is
returned or the information is filed against a person within 6
years after the commission of the offense, a person may not be
prosecuted, tried, or punished for a violation of, or a
conspiracy or an attempt to violate the offense in--
(1) section 201 or 666;
(2) section 1341 or 1343, when charged in conjunction
with section 1346 and where the offense involves a
scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible
right of honest services of a public official;
(3) section 1951, if the offense involves extortion
under color of official right;
(4) section 1952, to the extent that the unlawful
activity involves bribery; or
(5) section 1962, to the extent that the racketeering
activity involves bribery chargeable under State law,
involves a violation of section 201 or 666, section
1341 or 1343, when charged in conjunction with section
1346 and where the offense involves a scheme artifice
to deprive another of the intangible right of honest
services of a public official, or section 1951, if the
offense involves extortion under color of official
right.