    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1997, Book II)]
    [November 26, 1997]
    [Pages 1666-1669]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Statement on Signing the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State,
    the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998
    November 26, 1997

        Today I have signed into law H.R. 2267, the ``Departments of
    Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies
    Appropriations Act, 1998.''
        This Act provides over $31 billion in discretionary budget authority
    for vital law enforcement, international affairs, economic development,
    and environmental programs, I am pleased that the Act supports many of
    my priorities, particularly in the areas of law enforcement and crime
    prevention.
        For instance, H.R. 2267 provides for my request of $1.4 billion for
    the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program, helping us to
    achieve the goal of hiring 100,000 additional police officers by the
    year 2000. The Act also increases funding for programs to combat
    violence against women, and, finally, in the

    [[Page 1667]]

    important area of juvenile crime prevention, the Act provides $489
    million for juvenile justice, which includes a $250 million juvenile
    justice block grant. I am pleased that the block grant provides targeted
    funding for prosecutorial grants, which support prosecutors' efforts to
    reduce gang violence, as well as targeted funding for violent juvenile
    court assistance, which helps expedite the handling of juvenile
    offenders.
        I am deeply disappointed, however, that the Congress did not enact
    legislation to capitalize on all of our work this year to craft a
    broadly supported package of reforms for the United Nations system and
    to provide the related arrears funding. Recent events in Iraq have
    underscored the need for strong U.S. leadership in the United Nations
    and in other international organizations that would have been supported
    by this legislation.
        I regret that the Act does not contain the multi-year funding of the
    arrears package consistent with the Balanced Budget Agreement (BBA), and
    that the first $100 million is not available until Congress passes
    implementing legislation. Before the current adjournment, the Congress
    could have passed such legislation, but it was tied to extraneous
    conditions. With the United Nations making critical decisions this
    December on reform and funding issues, this implementing legislation
    would have put the United States in a good position to achieve
    international agreement on the kind of financial and other reforms we
    are seeking and to clear our arrears. Our negotiators in New York are
    now handicapped and must struggle to build majority support for these
    changes among the more than 185 members of the United Nations without
    being able to clearly signal the Congress' intention.
        I hope that the Congress will work with me to pass swiftly upon its
    return such implementing legislation that firmly signals to the rest of
    the world community U.S. commitment to the U.N. system, our intent to
    honor our international obligations, and our desire to make these
    organizations more effective and efficient as they work for us on
    critical issues. Such legislation should be free of extraneous issues.
        The Act does provide strong support for the operational accounts of
    the Department of State, including provisions to put in place the new
    International Cooperative Administrative Support Services (ICASS)
    program and to utilize revenues from Machine Readable visa fees. This
    support will allow the Department to modernize its technology, improve
    operations that support all U.S. agencies operating overseas, and
    continue to carry out its role in our Nation's important Border Security
    Program.
        This Act contains provisions that raise serious constitutional
    concerns. For example, section 609 unconstitutionally constrains the
    President's authority with respect to the conduct of diplomacy and
    section 610 unconstitutionally constrains the President's diplomatic
    authority and Commander in Chief authority. I will apply these
    provisions consistent with my constitutional responsibilities.
        The Act also includes provisions relating to the census. These
    provisions arose out of a disagreement whether the widely accepted
    statistical method known as sampling may be used in connection with the
    decennial census, consistent with the Constitution and the Census Act.
        It is my strong conviction, and it is the opinion of the Department
    of Justice, that sampling complies with both the Constitution and the
    Census Act. Although H.R. 2267 includes a congressional finding that
    sampling ``poses the risk of an inaccurate, invalid and unconstitutional
    census,'' I understand this language to mean only that the Congress
    believes the use of sampling raises an issue of constitutional
    interpretation appropriate for judicial review. Any census method, of
    course, poses a risk of inaccuracy, particularly if the method is not
    used correctly. But it is precisely to avoid inaccuracies in the census
    that sampling is justified. Given the history of undercounting children,
    minorities, and others in the census, inaccuracy and unfairness would
    result if the Congress prohibited sampling and instead mandated other
    methods.
        I support the Act because it provides the funding necessary for the
    Department of Commerce to prepare for the 2000 Census and, in
    particular, to conduct the critically important dress rehearsal
    scheduled for 1998. This is a dramatic improvement over an earlier
    version of the bill, which would have effectively banned sampling by
    delaying planning operations during litigation.
        Nonetheless, I have two concerns. First, under the Act the 2000
    Census remains, as it must, a one number census for the purposes of
    apportionment and redistricting. All official documents relating to the
    census will produce one final, accurate count of the population. In
    addition, the raw data collected by the Bureau

    [[Page 1668]]

    of the Census will be available to interested parties. These raw data
    are not usable for apportionment and redistricting.
        Second, in providing for a right of action to challenge the use of
    sampling before completion of the 2000 Census, the Act does not, nor
    could it, modify the ``immutable requirements'' of Article III of the
    Constitution regarding ripeness and standing to sue. Representatives of
    my Administration informed the Congress while it was considering the
    census provisions of their doubts whether the right to sue in the Act
    satisfies Article III requirements. Opponents of sampling in the 2000
    Census will have the opportunity to attempt to persuade the courts that
    it does, but the Department of Justice is obligated to challenge any
    suits that fail to meet applicable justiciability requirements.
        I hope that the Congress will join me, the National Academy of
    Sciences, the General Accounting Office, the Department of Commerce
    Inspector General, and the vast majority of the professional statistical
    community, in supporting the use of sampling in the decennial census. It
    is our responsibility to count every American, and we must not allow
    politics to prevent us from living up to that responsibility.
        I am pleased with the $4.3 billion in funding for the Department of
    Commerce, and am grateful that funds for Global Learning and
    Observations to Benefit the Environment program (GLOBE) program were
    restored in conference. GLOBE was developed to increase our
    understanding of the Earth, and has forged partnerships with over 2,500
    U.S. schools and 35 other countries, involving thousands of students
    across the United States and worldwide. I am disappointed, however, that
    the National Institutes of Standards and Technology is funded $15
    million below the level agreed to in the BBA. This cut comes at the
    expense of the Advanced Technology Program, which supports the
    development of pre-competitive, basic technology, and helps the United
    States remain on the cutting edge of the global economy.
        Fortunately, H.R. 2267 does not split the Ninth Circuit Court into
    two separate circuits--as earlier versions of the bill would have--but
    instead establishes a commission to study the organization of the
    Federal Courts of Appeals more broadly. This is a far more reasoned
    approach than the split of the Circuit contained in an earlier version
    of the appropriations bill, and it will permit all affected parties to
    voice their views.
        I am pleased that H.R. 2267 will continue to permit eligible
    individuals to obtain lawful permanent resident status without leaving
    the country. While we sought a permanent extension of section 245(I) of
    the Immigration and Nationality Act, in its current form these
    provisions will help ensue that families remain together and businesses
    are not disrupted while persons already in the United States go through
    the immigration process.
        The Act also includes authority for the Federal Bureau of
    Investigation to develop a 3-year pilot program for compensation of non-
    Special Agents in scientific, technical, and similar positions. In
    addition, the bill gives the Department of the Treasury authority to
    implement demonstration programs for such positions in the Bureau of
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, the United States Customs Service, and
    the United States Secret Service. While I strongly support efforts to
    ensure the highest quality work force for these critical law enforcement
    agencies, this new authority does not appear necessary. There is no
    evidence of recruitment and retention problems for these occupational
    categories that could not be solved through existing authorities. In
    addition, the budget impact of implementing these provisions is not
    known. I am, therefore, directing the two departments to work with the
    Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management
    to resolve these issues before developing any plan to implement this new
    authority.
        As a number of lower courts have recognized, the automatic stay
    provision of the Prison Litigation Reform Act raises a significant
    constitutional issue. Section 123 of H.R. 2267 amends this provision in
    a manner that may affect the constitutional issue and the position that
    my Administration will need to take in litigation. The Department of
    Justice will evaluate the amended provision further, and, if necessary,
    propose remedies to ameliorate any constitutional problems.
        I am pleased that the Congress rejected efforts to reduce funding
    for the Legal Services Corporation (LSC), thus ensuring that
    disadvantaged Americans continue to have access to the judicial system.
    But, I remain concerned about the erosion of financial support for the
    LSC over time, and I am hopeful that the Congress

    [[Page 1669]]

    will approve increases for this program in the future.
        Finally, the Act provides $6 million in contingent Department of
    Agriculture emergency funding for indemnity payments to farmers and
    ranchers who suffered livestock losses in the West due to the unusually
    early and heavy winter snowstorm in October. I will soon transmit a
    budget request to make these funds available.

                                                          William J. Clinton

    The White House,

    November 26, 1997.

    Note: H.R. 2267, approved November 26, was assigned Public Law No. 105-
    119.