[Senate Report 112-182]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 404
112th Congress } { Report
2d Session } SENATE { 112-182
=======================================================================
BULLETPROOF VEST PARTNERSHIP GRANT ACT OF 2012
_______
July 12, 2012.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Leahy, from the Committee on Judiciary,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
MINORITY VIEWS
[To accompany S. 2554]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the
bill (S. 2554), to amend title I of the Omnibus Crime Control
and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to extend the authorization of the
Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program through fiscal year
2017, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon, as
amended, and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
I. Background and Purpose of the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant
Act of 2012......................................................2
II. History of the Bill and Committee Consideration..................5
III. Section-by-Section Summary of the Bill...........................6
IV. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................7
V. Regulatory Impact Evaluation.....................................8
VI. Conclusion.......................................................8
VII. Minority Views of Senator Coburn.................................9
VIII.Changes to Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported...........10
I. Background and Purpose of the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act
of 2012
A. BACKGROUND
Since its enactment in 1998, the Bulletproof Vest
Partnership Grant Act has provided over $300 million to assist
State and local law enforcement agencies with the procurement
of nearly one million ballistic-resistant body armor vests. A
report released by the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
in February 2012 states that available data shows that since
1987, body armor has saved the lives of more than 3,000 law
enforcement officers nationwide.\1\ The RAND Corporation
conducted research that found law enforcement officers who did
not wear body armor were 3.4 times more likely to suffer a
fatal injury from a gunshot to the torso than law enforcement
officers who are equipped with body armor.\2\ The persistent
dangers associated with law enforcement work,\3\ advances in
body armor technology, equipment degradation, and continuing
budgetary challenges faced by State and local law enforcement
agencies\4\ commend the improvement and reauthorization of this
essential lifesaving program.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\U.S. Gov't Accountability Office, GAO-12-353, Law Enforcement
Body Armor: DOJ Could Enhance Grant Management Controls and Better
Ensure Consistency in Grant Program Requirements 1 (2012).
\2\Id.
\3\See, e.g., Preliminary 2012 Fatality Statistics, Nat'l Law
Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund (2012), http://www.nleomf.org/facts/
officer-fatalities-data/; Law Enforcement Officer Deaths: Preliminary
2011 Report, Nat'l Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, http://
www.nleomf.org/assets/pdfs/reports/2011-EOY-Report.pdf; Law Enforcement
Officer Deaths: Preliminary 2010 Report, Nat'l Law Enforcement Officers
Memorial Fund, http://www.nleomf.org/assets/pdfs/reports/
2010_Law_Enforcement_Fatalities_Report.pdf.
\4\The Impact of the Economic Downturn on American Police Agencies,
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services U.S. Dep't of Justice,
(2011).
\5\In his minority view, Senator Coburn notes his lone vote
opposing the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act of 2012. He also
opposes the Public Safety Officers Benefits Act, which provides a
Federal death benefit to the surviving families of first responders who
are killed in the line of duty. He is objecting to passage of the
bipartisan, bicameral, and cost-neutral Public Safety Officers'
Benefits Improvements Act of 2011, S.1696, which would make important
reforms to a program that has assisted the families of thousands of
police officers and other first responders who have lost their lives
protecting their communities and fellow citizens. Chuck Canterbury of
the Fraternal Order of Police, one of our Nation's law enforcement
leaders, wrote to the Chairmen of the Senate and House Judiciary
Committees:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FOP views this not as a politician embracing the
principle of federalism, but as a . . . ploy to place even
greater strain between law enforcement and other public
safety officers that serve on the local and State level and
their colleagues employed by the Federal government. When a
police officer puts himself in harm's way, he does not stop
to think about jurisdiction. He does not ask the offender
if he is committing a local, State, or Federal crime. He
acts in the best interest of the safety of those he has
sworn to protect. A family that loses a loved one in the
line of duty should not just be left adrift, their
sacrifice ignored because their loved one was a local
firefighter or State Trooper and not a Federal agent.
The Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act has been
reauthorized four times since its enactment in 1998.\6\ The
program was originally authorized at an annual level of $25
million. It was reauthorized again at that level in 2000.
Following its first reauthorization, Congress reauthorized the
program at $50 million for each of fiscal years 2002, 2003,
2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-
517, 114 Stat. 2407 (2000); State Justice Institute Reauthorization Act
of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-372, Sec. 4, 118 Stat. 1755 (2004); Violence
Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005,
Pub. L. No. 109-162, Sec. 1116, 119 Stat. 3104 (2006); Bulletproof Vest
Partnership Grant Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-421, 122 Stat. 4778
(2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act has
traditionally enjoyed broad congressional support;\7\ the most
recent reauthorization passed the House on a vote of 404-2, and
passed the Senate with unanimous consent.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\In his minority view, Senator Coburn states that in his view the
Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program ``violates the principles of
federalism outlined in the Constitution.'' The Constitution does not
prohibit Congress from providing support to State and local law
enforcement through competitive grant programs. Indeed, section 8 of
Article I in the Constitution empowers Congress to provide for the
``general Welfare of the United States.'' Congress provides for the
general welfare of our Nation by assisting State and local law
enforcement just as it provides aid to States following tornadoes,
hurricanes, or wild fires without being expressly ``tasked'' with that
responsibility by a more specific constitutional clause. Supporting our
Nation's law enforcement officials in the use and deployment of safety
equipment, and encouraging more Americans to serve their communities as
first responders, falls squarely within this constitutional provision.
Congress has traditionally acted to support our Federal system through
beneficial legislation for the States, which in turn benefits the
Nation as a whole.
State and local law enforcement officials often serve as our first
responders and first line of defense in national security emergencies
and natural disasters. The Federal Government works with State and
local law enforcement agencies on a variety of joint task forces
including national and regional Joint Terrorism Task Forces, Cyber
Crime Task Forces, and the Innocent Images National Initiative. In
light of the broad assistance State and local law enforcement officials
provide to their Federal counterparts, modest Federal support for
protective equipment for State and local law enforcement agents is
appropriate. These relationships strengthen our Federal system.
\8\154 Cong. Rec. H9980 (September 26, 2008), 154 Cong. Rec. S10184
(September 30, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. KEY PROVISIONS OF THE LEGISLATION
The Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act of 2012, S.
2554, would reauthorize the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant
program established by Public Law No. 105-181, through Fiscal
Year 2017. It would reauthorize the program at a level of $15
million for fiscal years 2013 and 2014, and would increase the
authorization level to $30 million for fiscal years 2015, 2016,
and 2017. In addition to the revised authorization levels, the
legislation makes several other changes to the program as
described below.
In response to a recent Government Accountability Office
(GAO) report detailing the existence of obligated, undisbursed
balances at the Department of Justice's Office of Justice
Programs,\9\ which had been appropriated pursuant to the Act's
authorization, S. 2554 would adjust the authorization of
appropriations to $15,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2013 and
2014 and raise it to $30,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2015,
2016 and 2017. The adjusted authorization levels for fiscal
years 2013 and 2014 do not reflect any desire to reduce overall
funding of the program. Rather, S. 2554 encourages the
Department of Justice to supplement appropriations during
fiscal years 2013 and 2014 with existing obligated but
undisbursed funds that accrued between fiscal years 1999-2011,
estimated by the GAO to be approximately $27 million.\10\ The
bill would require the Department of Justice to expend the
accrued funds prior to September 30, 2014. Any remaining
balance of these accrued funds at the end of fiscal year 2014
would be returned to the General Fund of the Treasury. Thus,
the Committee expects that the estimated $27 million in
undisbursed funds identified by the GAO will be used to offset
the reduction in the authorization levels for 2013 and 2014 and
for the benefit of grantee law enforcement agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\U.S. Gov't Accountability Office, GAO-12-353, Law Enforcement
Body Armor: DOJ Could Enhance Grant Management Controls and Better
Ensure Consistency in Grant Program Requirements 19-21 (2012).
\10\Id. at 20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bill contains a sense of Congress that funds
appropriated under the authority of the Bulletproof Vest
Partnership Grant Act must be expended by the Department of
Justice within two fiscal years of the appropriation.
Currently, funds appropriated for the Program contain no
requirement from Congress that disbursement occur within a
definite time period, referred to as ``no-year'' money. The
inclusion of such a requirement, in the Committee's view, would
assist the Department of Justice in awarding and disbursing
funding to grantees in a timely manner, and would, in the event
a grantee did not ultimately seek reimbursement of funding for
which it had initially applied, encourage the Department to de-
obligate those funds in a timely manner to be used for the
benefit of another qualifying grantee law enforcement agency.
The bill would codify current Department of Justice grant-
making policy to prohibit a grantee law enforcement agency from
using funding obtained from any other Federal grant program to
satisfy the statutory matching requirement contained in the
Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act.\11\ The statutory
matching requirement is an important and longstanding component
of the grant program that underscores congressional policy
which, absent compelling circumstances of financial hardship,
requires a grantee law enforcement agency to share in the cost
of the equipment. The provision contained in S. 2554 is
intended to formalize and reinforce the Justice Department's
existing policy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\42 U.S.C. Sec. 3796ll(f); 28 CFR Sec. 33.101(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its report of February 2012, the GAO recommended that
the standards and requirements to which grantees are held under
the Bulletproof Partnership Grant Act be followed by grantees
when using Justice Assistance Grants (JAG) to purchase body
armor.\12\ The Committee agrees that uniformity among standards
and policies should be promoted and honored when grantee law
enforcement agencies are accepting any Federal funding for body
armor. The bill, therefore, codifies the policy that when a
grantee uses any Federal grant funding administered by the
Bureau of Justice Assistance, the grantee must adhere to the
mandatory wear policy and body armor performance standards in
place within the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant
Program.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\U.S. Gov't Accountability Office, GAO-12-353, Law Enforcement
Body Armor: DOJ Could Enhance Grant Management Controls and Better
Ensure Consistency in Grant Program Requirements 24 (2012).
\13\In his minority view, Senator Coburn also seeks to rely on the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) February, 2012 report to
criticize the bipartisan, Committee-approved bill. This criticism is
also misplaced. The Chairman and Ranking Member worked collaboratively
to craft provisions that directly respond to recommendations contained
in the GAO report. In addition, at the Committee hearing on this
matter, the GAO reported that the Department of Justice was equipped
and prepared to respond affirmatively to all of the GAO's
recommendations. In particular, the Justice Department agreed to expand
publication of grant requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, S. 2554 amends 42 U.S.C. Sec. 3796ll(c) to add an
additional preference for grant consideration to the existing
factors that the Department of Justice may consider when
evaluating whether a potential grantee merits preferential
consideration for grant funding. The bill would permit the
Department of Justice to weigh as a factor the existence of a
policy within a potential grantee law enforcement agency to
provide uniquely fitted armor vests for its female officers and
others. The Committee agrees that local policies that support
maximum effectiveness in vest fit and performance should be
encouraged and taken into consideration when evaluating grantee
applications for reimbursement under the Bulletproof Vest
Partnership Grant Act.
II. History of the Bill and Committee Consideration
A. INTRODUCTION OF THE BILL
The Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act of 2012 was
introduced as S. 2554 on May 7, 2012 by Senator Leahy, Senator
Coons, Senator Klobuchar, Senator Kohl, Senator Mikulski,
Senator Schumer and Senator Whitehouse. The bill was referred
to the Committee on the Judiciary. Since the date of
introduction, Senator Blumenthal, Senator Durbin, Senator
Feinstein, Senator Franken, and Senator Merkley have joined as
cosponsors.
B. COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
1. Hearing
The Committee held a hearing on the Bulletproof Vest
Partnership Grant Program on February 15, 2012, during which
the Committee heard testimony concerning the importance of the
program, the need for reauthorization, and recommended
enhancements in its administration by the Department of
Justice.
Testimony was received from Michael Schirling, Chief of
Police of the Burlington Police Department; David Maurer,
Director of the Homeland Security and Justice Team at the
United States Government Accountability Office; and Chuck
Canterbury, National President of the Fraternal Order of
Police. Additional testimony was submitted by Jack G. Fackler,
North America Marketing Manager--Law Enforcement, Fire Service,
Emergency Response; and E. I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company,
Du Pont Protection Technologies. A letter and statement was
submitted by Sheriff Paul H. Fitzgerald, President of the
National Sheriffs' Association. Written testimony was submitted
by Chief Ron McBride (Ret.), IACP/DuPont Kevlar Survivors'
Club. Testimony was submitted by William J. Johnson, Executive
Director, National Association of Police Organizations.
2. Executive Business Meeting
The Committee considered S. 2554 on May 17, 2012. Senator
Grassley offered an amendment to the Bulletproof Vest
Partnership Grant Act of 2012. Senator Grassley's amendment
proposed to adjust downward the authorizations provided for
fiscal years 2013 and 2014 to $15 million, and proposed to
reduce the authorizations for the remaining three years from
$50 million to $30 million. His amendment proposed to require
that the Department of Justice expend any existing obligated
but undisbursed balances in the program prior to September 30,
2014. Senator Grassley's amendment proposed a Sense of the
Senate clause that recommended a two year spending cycle for
the Department of Justice's disbursement of appropriated
funding. Senator Grassley's amendment proposed to codify
current Department of Justice policy disallowing the use of
Federal grant funding by a law enforcement agency to satisfy
the statutory matching requirement under the Bulletproof Vest
Partnership Grant Program. Finally, Senator Grassley's
amendment proposed to require any Federal grantee using Federal
funding to purchase body armor to adhere to the standards and
requirements applicable to grantees under the Bulletproof Vest
Partnership Grant Act. The amendment was accepted by unanimous
consent.
Senator Feinstein offered an amendment to the Bulletproof
Vest Partnership Grant Act of 2012. Senator Feinstein's
amendment proposed to amend 42 U.S.C. Sec. 3796ll(c) to add, as
a potential factor for preferential consideration of an
application by the Department of Justice, whether a potential
grantee law enforcement agency has a policy to provide uniquely
fitted body armor, including for female officers. The amendment
was accepted by unanimous consent.
The Committee then voted to report the Bulletproof Vest
Partnership Grant Act of 2012, as amended, favorably to the
Senate by voice vote. Senator Coburn asked to be recorded as
voting ``no''.
III. Section-by-Section Summary of the Bill
Section 1. Short title
This section provides that the legislation may be cited as
the ``Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program
Reauthorization Act of 2012''
Section 2. Extension of authorization of appropriations for Bulletproof
Vest Partnership Grant Program
This section amends section 1001(a) of title I of the
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 by striking
part Y, the current authorization of appropriations for the
Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program, and inserting
$15,000,000 for each fiscal years 2013 and 2014, and
$30,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2015, 2016, and 2017.
Section 3. Expiration of previously appropriated funds
This section amends Section 2501 of title I of the Omnibus
Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1986 by defining
previously appropriated funds as amounts that were appropriated
for any of fiscal years 1999 through 2011 to carry out this
part [the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program] and that
are available to be expended and have not been expended,
including funds that were previously obligated but undisbursed
and creates an expiration date for all previously appropriated
funds that are not expended by September 30, 2014, requiring
they be returned to the General Fund of the Treasury no later
than January 15, 2015.
Section 4. Sense of Congress on 2-year limitation on funds
This section expresses the sense of Congress that funding
appropriated for the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program
should be made available through the end of the first fiscal
year following the fiscal year for which the amounts are
appropriated and should not be made available until expended.
Section 5. Matching fund limitation
This section creates a limitation on using funding received
under any other Federal grant program to pay or defer the cost,
in whole or in part of the matching requirement.
Section 6. Application of Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program
requirements to any bulletproof vest or body armor purchased
with Federal grant funds
This section amends Section 521 of title I of the Omnibus
Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to require that a
grantee using funds made available by the Bulletproof Vest
Grant Partnership Program comply with any requirements
established for the use of the grants, have a written policy
requiring uniformed patrol officers to wear a bulletproof vest
or body armor, and use the funds to purchase bulletproof vests
or body armor that meet any performance standards established
by the Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance.
Section 7. Uniquely fitted armor vests
This section amends title I of the Omnibus Crime Control
and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to permit the Department of
Justice to weigh local policies for the purpose of affording
applicants preferential consideration, among existing
enumerated factors, relating to the purchase of armor vests for
law enforcement officers that are uniquely fitted for such
officers including vests uniquely fitted to individual female
law enforcement officers.
IV. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
The Committee sets forth, with respect to the bill, S.2554,
the following estimate and comparison prepared by the Director
of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, June 1, 2012.
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. 2554, the
Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program Reauthorization Act
of 2012.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark
Grabowicz.
Sincerely,
Douglas W. Elmendorf.
Enclosure.
S. 2554--Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program Reauthorization Act
of 2012.
Summary: S. 2554 would authorize the appropriation of $120
million over the 2013-2017 period for the Bulletproof Vest
Partnership Grant program.
Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO
estimates that implementing S. 2554 would cost $72 million over
the 2013-2017 period. Pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply to
this legislation because it would not affect direct spending or
revenues.
S. 2554 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of S. 2554 is shown in the following table.
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 750
(administration of justice).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-------------------------------------------------------
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2013-2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Authorization Level..................................... 15 15 30 30 30 120
Estimated Outlays....................................... 3 8 14 21 26 72
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the
amounts authorized by the bill will be appropriated by the
start of each fiscal year and that outlays will follow the
historical rate of spending for this program. Under the
Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant, the Department of Justice
makes grants to state, local, and tribal law enforcement
agencies to purchase bulletproof vests. S. 2554 would authorize
the appropriation of $15 million for each of 2013 and 2014 and
$30 million for each of 2015 through 2017 for the program. In
2012, the grant program received an appropriation of $24
million.
Pay-As-You-Go Considerations: None.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 2554
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined UMRA. Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts,
state, local, and tribal governments would receive $120 million
to purchase bulletproof vests. Any costs to those governments
would be incurred voluntarily as a condition of receiving
federal assistance.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Mark Grabowicz; Impact
on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Melissa Merrell;
Impact on the Private Sector: Vi Nguyen
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. 2554.
VI. Conclusion
The Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act of 2012, S.
2554, reauthorizes the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant
Program established by Public Law No. 105-181 through fiscal
year 2017. This law has made essential contributions to the
safety of law enforcement officers across the United States,
and has assisted in promoting the use of body armor among law
enforcement officers. The grant program authorized by the law,
which is a partnership between the Federal Government, and
State and local law enforcement agencies, recognizes the
reliance that each places on the other in combating criminal
activity, safeguarding communities, and responding to local and
national emergencies. The Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant
Act of 2012 continues Congress' longstanding tradition of
support and partnership with State and local law enforcement
agencies across the United States.
VII. Minority Views
----------
MINORITY VIEWS FROM SENATOR COBURN
I write these views to explain my vote opposing S. 2554,
the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act of 2012, as amended
by Senator Grassley's committee substitute, considered at the
Senate Judiciary Committee's May 17th markup. I have several
outstanding concerns with this legislation. In particular, I
believe this legislation violates the principles of federalism
outlined in the Constitution, fails to completely address
several management and control issues identified in a
Government Accountability Office (GAO) report to Congress on
the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program (BVPP), and disregards
our country's fragile financial condition.
I support the motive behind this legislation and believe
the protection of federal, state, and local law enforcement
agents is of paramount importance. However, we must at all
times carefully weigh the proper role of the federal government
so Congress does not violate its limited authority under the
Constitution. I believe the responsibility to address this
issue, as it relates to state and local law enforcement
officers, lies with the states and local communities these
brave officers serve. The Constitution does not task the
federal government with providing funding to states and
localities for the operation of their law enforcement agencies;
although grant programs such as BVPP are laudable, they are not
the federal government's responsibility.
Furthermore, while I do not believe this issue is the
responsibility of the federal government, if Congress does act,
we can and must do so in a fiscally responsible manner. S. 2554
will cost the American people $120 million over five years
without corresponding offsets. This funding is authorized
despite a recent GAO finding that, of the $340 million in total
Bulletproof Vest Program awards from 1999-2012, approximately
$93 million remained undisbursed by the Bureau of Justice
Assistance (BJA).\1\ This total includes about $27 million
which could be immediately deobligated and applied to new
grants, and another $52 million that may be available at the
end of the fiscal year.\2\ While this bill takes some initial,
positive steps in response to the findings of the GAO report,
Congress should not authorize any additional funding while such
sums remain undisbursed by the Bureau of Justice Assistance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\U.S. Government Accountability Office, DOJ Could Enhance Grant
Management Controls and Better Ensure Consistency in Grant Program
Requirements, February, 2012, at 18, available at http://gao.gov/
assets/590/588573.pdf.
\2\Id. at 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although this legislation reduces the authorizations for
BVPP from previous reauthorization levels, any reduction will
be offset by up to $79 million in undisbursed funds currently
under the control of BJA. This means no actual savings are
achieved under this legislation, and no offsets for new
spending are provided. The fiscal condition of our country has
worsened dramatically since the original passage of this bill
in 1998 and the last reauthorization in 2008. As our national
debt climbs higher every day, the federal government is in no
position to spend more money on any grant programs without
offsets. We simply cannot afford it.
In addition to these fiscal concerns, there are several
problems specific to the Bulletproof Vest Program. For example,
GAO found that a lack of available information on program
requirements from the Department of Justice could lead to
noncompliance by grantees and encouraged the Department to take
action to better publicize these requirements. The GAO report
points out that ``[t]he BVP program lists its requirements,
such as those related to document retention and the prohibition
on combining BVP and JAG funds, in limited areas, thus
increasing the risk that grantees would not be aware of
them.''\3\ When GAO contacted ten jurisdictions to question
them about the program, all ten jurisdictions were unaware of
the policy requiring them to retain grant documents for three
years, and three jurisdictions were not aware of a prohibition
on using other federal grant funds as matching funds for the
Bulletproof Vest Program. The Department of Justice must take
steps to improve compliance with the terms and conditions of
the grant program; although this bill would codify DOJ's rule
on matching grant funds, it does not address GAO's concerns
about publication of grant requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\Id. at 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, while I applaud and support Senator Grassley's
effort to reduce authorizations and to address the substantive
concerns identified in the GAO report, for the reasons I
outlined above, I remain concerned with the bill as amended by
his substitute. Although his substitute bill is likely a better
alternative to S. 2554 as it was introduced, it still runs
counter to my basic constitutional concerns with grant programs
for state and local law enforcement agencies.
As a result, I cannot support S. 2554, the Bulletproof Vest
Partnership Grant Act of 2012, as reported by the Senate
Judiciary Committee.
Tom Coburn.
VIII. 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.2554, 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):
UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 42--PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 46--JUSTICE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT
Subchapter V--Bureau of Justice Assistance Grant Programs
PART C--ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 3766a. General Provisions.
(a) The Bureau shall prepare both a ``Program Brief'' and
``Implementation Guide'' document for proven programs and
projects to be funded under this subchapter.
(b) The functions, powers, and duties specified in this
subchapter to be carried out by the Bureau shall not be
transferred elsewhere in the Department of Justice unless
specifically hereafter authorized by the Congress by law.
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a grantee
that uses funds made available under this part to purchase a
bulletproof vest or body armor shall comply with any
requirement established for the use of grants made under part Y
that an agency receiving funding under part Y--
(1) have a written policy requiring uniformed patrol
officers to wear a bulletproof vest or body armor; and
(2) use the funds to purchased bulletproof vest or
body armor that meet any performance standards
established by the Director of the Bureau of Justice
Assistance.
* * * * * * *
Subchapter X--Funding
* * * * * * *
Sec. 3793(a)(23). Authorization of appropriations.
[(23) There are authorized to be appropriated to
carry out subchapter XII-M of this chapter, $25,000,000
for each of fiscal years 1999 through 2001, and
$50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through
2012.]
(23) There are authorized to be appropriated to carry
out [subchapter XII-M] of this chapter--
(A) $15,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2013
and 2014; and
(B) $30,000,000 for each of fiscal years
2015, 2016, and 2017.
* * * * * * *
Subchapter XII-M--Matching Grant Program for Law Enforcement Armor Vest
* * * * * * *
Sec. 3796ll. Program Authorized.
(a) In General.--The Director of the Bureau of Justice
Assistance is authorized to make grants to States, units of
local government, and Indian tribes to purchase armor vests for
use by State, local, and tribal law enforcement officers and
State and local court officers.
(b) Uses of Funds.--Grants awarded under this section shall
be--
(1) distributed directly to the State, unit of local
government, State or local court, or Indian tribe; and
(2) used for the purchase of armor vests for law
enforcement officers in the jurisdiction of the
grantee.
(c) Preferential Consideration.--In awarding grants under
this subchapter, the Director of the Bureau of Justice
Assistance may give preferential consideration, if feasible, to
an application from a jurisdiction that--
(1) has the greatest need for armor vests based on
the percentage of law enforcement officers in the
department who do not have access to a vest;
(2) has, or will institute, a mandatory wear policy
that requires on-duty law enforcement officers to wear
armor vests whenever feasible; [and]
(3) has a violent crime rate at or above the national
average as determined by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation; [or] and
(4) provides armor vests to law enforcement officers
that are uniquely fitted for such officers, including
vest uniquely fitted to individual female law
enforcement officers; or
(5) has not received a block grant under the Local
Law Enforcement Block Grant program described under the
heading ``Violent Crime Reduction Programs, State and
Local Law Enforcement Assistance'' of the Departments
of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998 (Public Law
105-119).
(d) Minimum Amount.--Unless all eligible applications
submitted by any State or unit of local government within such
State for a grant under this section have been funded, such
State, together with grantees within the State (other than
Indian tribes), shall be allocated in each fiscal year under
this section not less than 0.50 percent of the total amount
appropriated in the fiscal year for grants pursuant to this
section, except that the United States Virgin Islands, American
Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands shall each be
allocated .25 percent.
(e) Maximum Amount.--A qualifying State, unit of local
government, or Indian tribe may not receive more than 5 percent
of the total amount appropriated in each fiscal year for grants
under this section, except that a State, together with the
grantees within the State may not receive more than 20 percent
of the total amount appropriated in each fiscal year for grants
under this section.
(f) Matching Funds.--
(1) In general.--The portion of the costs of a
program provided by a grant under subsection (a) of
this section--
(A) may not exceed 50 percent; and
(B) shall equal 50 percent, if--
(i) such grant is to a unit of local
government with fewer than 100,000
residents;
(ii) the Director of the Bureau of
Justice Assistance determines that the
quantity of vests to be purchased with
such grant is reasonable; and
(iii) such portion does not cause
such grant to violate the requirements
of subsection (e) of this section.
(2) Indian assistance.--Any funds appropriated by
Congress for the activities of any agency of an Indian
tribal government or the Bureau of Indian Affairs
performing law enforcement functions on any Indian
lands may be used to provide the non-Federal share of a
matching requirement funded under this subsection.
(3) Limitation on state matching funds.--A State,
unit of local government, or Indian tribe mat not use
funding received under any other Federal grant program
to pay or defer the cost, in whole or in part, of the
matching requirement under paragraph (1).
(4) Waiver.--The Director may waive in whole or in
part, the match requirement of paragraph (1) in the
case of fiscal hardship, as determined by the Director.
(g) Allocation of Funds.--Funds available under this
subchapter shall be awarded, without regard to subsection (c)
of this section, to each qualifying unit of local government
with fewer than 100,000 residents. Any remaining funds
available under this subchapter shall be awarded to other
qualifying applicants.
(h) Expiration of Previously Appropriated Funds.--
(1) Definition.--In this subsection, the term
`previously appropriated funds' means any amounts
that--
(A) Were appropriated for any fiscal years
1999 through 2011 to carry out this part; and
(B) On the date of enactment of the
Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program
Reauthorization Act of 2012 are available to be
expended and have not been expended, including
funds that were previously obligated but
undisbursed.
(2) Expiration.--All previously appropriated funds
that are not expended by September 30, 2014, shall be
transferred to the General Fund of the Treasury no
later than January 15, 2015.