[Pages H8572-H8578]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

DNA ANALYSIS BACKLOG ELIMINATION ACT OF 2000

Mr. CANADY of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
pass the bill (H.R. 4640) to make grants to States for carrying out DNA
analyses for use in the Combined DNA Index System of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation, to provide for the collection and analysis of DNA
samples from certain violent and sexual offenders for

[[Page H8573]]

use in such system, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:

H.R. 4640

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``DNA Analysis Backlog
Elimination Act of 2000''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF GRANTS.

(a) Authorization of Grants.--The Attorney General may make
grants to eligible States for use by the State for the
following purposes:
(1) To carry out, for inclusion in the Combined DNA Index
System of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, DNA analyses
of samples taken from individuals convicted of a qualifying
State offense (as determined under subsection (b)(3)).
(2) To carry out, for inclusion in such Combined DNA Index
System, DNA analyses of samples from crime scenes.
(3) To increase the capacity of laboratories owned by the
State or by units of local government within the State to
carry out DNA analyses of samples specified in paragraph (2).
(b) Eligibility.--For a State to be eligible to receive a
grant under this section, the chief executive officer of the
State shall submit to the Attorney General an application in
such form and containing such information as the Attorney
General may require. The application shall--
(1) provide assurances that the State has implemented, or
will implement not later than 120 days after the date of such
application, a comprehensive plan for the expeditious DNA
analysis of samples in accordance with this section;
(2) include a certification that each DNA analysis carried
out under the plan shall be maintained pursuant to the
privacy requirements described in section 210304(b)(3) of the
Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42
U.S.C. 14132(b)(3));
(3) include a certification that the State has determined,
by statute, rule, or regulation, those offenses under State
law that shall be treated for purposes of this section as
qualifying State offenses;
(4) specify the allocation that the State shall make, in
using grant amounts to carry out DNA analyses of samples, as
between samples specified in subsection (a)(1) and samples
specified in subsection (a)(2); and
(5) specify that portion of grant amounts that the State
shall use for the purpose specified in subsection (a)(3).
(c) Crimes Without Suspects.--A State that proposes to
allocate grant amounts under paragraph (4) or (5) of
subsection (b) for the purposes specified in paragraph (2) or
(3) of subsection (a) shall use such allocated amounts to
conduct or facilitate DNA analyses of those samples that
relate to crimes in connection with which there are no
suspects.
(d) Analysis of Samples.--
(1) In general.--The plan shall require that, except as
provided in paragraph (3), each DNA analysis be carried out
in a laboratory that satisfies quality assurance standards
and is--
(A) operated by the State or a unit of local government
within the State; or
(B) operated by a private entity pursuant to a contract
with the State or a unit of local government within the
State.
(2) Quality assurance standards.--(A) The Director of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation shall maintain and make
available to States a description of quality assurance
protocols and practices that the Director considers adequate
to assure the quality of a forensic laboratory.
(B) For purposes of this section, a laboratory satisfies
quality assurance standards if the laboratory satisfies the
quality control requirements described in paragraphs (1) and
(2) of section 210304(b) of the Violent Crime Control and Law
Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14132(b)).
(3) Use of vouchers for certain purposes.--A grant for the
purposes specified in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (a)
may be made in the form of a voucher for laboratory services,
which may be redeemed at a laboratory operated by a private
entity approved by the Attorney General that satisfies
quality assurance standards. The Attorney General may make
payment to such a laboratory for the analysis of DNA samples
using amounts authorized for those purposes under subsection
(j).
(e) Restrictions on Use of Funds.--
(1) Nonsupplanting.--Funds made available pursuant to this
section shall not be used to supplant State funds, but shall
be used to increase the amount of funds that would, in the
absence of Federal funds, be made available from State
sources for the purposes of this Act.
(2) Administrative costs.--A State may not use more than
three percent of the funds it receives from this section for
administrative expenses.
(f) Reports to the Attorney General.--Each State which
receives a grant under this section shall submit to the
Attorney General, for each year in which funds from a grant
received under this section is expended, a report at such
time and in such manner as the Attorney General may
reasonably require, which contains--
(1) a summary of the activities carried out under the grant
and an assessment of whether such activities are meeting the
needs identified in the application; and
(2) such other information as the Attorney General may
require.
(g) Reports to Congress.--Not later than 90 days after the
end of each fiscal year for which grants are made under this
section, the Attorney General shall submit to the Congress a
report that includes--
(1) the aggregate amount of grants made under this section
to each State for such fiscal year; and
(2) a summary of the information provided by States
receiving grants under this section.
(h) Expenditure Records.--
(1) In general.--Each State which receives a grant under
this section shall keep records as the Attorney General may
require to facilitate an effective audit of the receipt and
use of grant funds received under this section.
(2) Access.--Each State which receives a grant under this
section shall make available, for the purpose of audit and
examination, such records as are related to the receipt or
use of any such grant.
(i) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term
``State'' means a State of the United States, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States
Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern
Mariana Islands.
(j) Authorization of Appropriations.--Amounts are
authorized to be appropriated to the Attorney General for
grants under subsection (a) as follows:
(1) For grants for the purposes specified in paragraph (1)
of such subsection--
(A) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2001;
(B) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2002; and
(C) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2003.
(2) For grants for the purposes specified in paragraphs (2)
and (3) of such subsection--
(A) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2001;
(B) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2002;
(C) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2003; and
(D) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2004.

SEC. 3. COLLECTION AND USE OF DNA IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION
FROM CERTAIN FEDERAL OFFENDERS.

(a) Collection of DNA Samples.--
(1) From individuals in custody.--The Director of the
Bureau of Prisons shall collect a DNA sample from each
individual in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons who is, or
has been, convicted of a qualifying Federal offense (as
determined under subsection (d)) or a qualifying military
offense, as determined under section 1565 of title 10, United
States Code.
(2) From individuals on release, parole, or probation.--The
probation office responsible for the supervision under
Federal law of an individual on probation, parole, or
supervised release shall collect a DNA sample from each such
individual who is, or has been, convicted of a qualifying
Federal offense (as determined under subsection (d)) or a
qualifying military offense, as determined under section 1565
of title 10, United States Code.
(3) Individuals already in codis.--For each individual
described in paragraph (1) or (2), if the Combined DNA Index
System (in this section referred to as ``CODIS'') of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation contains a DNA analysis with
respect to that individual, or if a DNA sample has been
collected from that individual under section 1565 of title
10, United States Code, the Director of the Bureau of Prisons
or the probation office responsible (as applicable) may (but
need not) collect a DNA sample from that individual.
(4) Collection procedures.--(A) The Director of the Bureau
of Prisons or the probation office responsible (as
applicable) may use or authorize the use of such means as are
reasonably necessary to detain, restrain, and collect a DNA
sample from an individual who refuses to cooperate in the
collection of the sample.
(B) The Director of the Bureau of Prisons or the probation
office, as appropriate, may enter into agreements with units
of State or local government or with private entities to
provide for the collection of the samples described in
paragraph (1) or (2).
(5) Criminal penalty.--An individual from whom the
collection of a DNA sample is authorized under this
subsection who fails to cooperate in the collection of that
sample shall be--
(A) guilty of a class A misdemeanor; and
(B) punished in accordance with title 18, United States
Code.
(b) Analysis and Use of Samples.--The Director of the
Bureau of Prisons or the probation office responsible (as
applicable) shall furnish each DNA sample collected under
subsection (a) to the Director of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, who shall carry out a DNA analysis on each
such DNA sample and include the results in CODIS.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``DNA sample'' means a tissue, fluid, or other
bodily sample of an individual on which a DNA analysis can be
carried out.
(2) The term ``DNA analysis'' means analysis of the
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) identification information in a
bodily sample.
(d) Qualifying Federal Offenses.--(1) The offenses that
shall be treated for purposes of this section as qualifying
Federal offenses are the following offenses under title 18,
United States Code, as determined by the Attorney General:
(A) Murder (as described in section 1111 of such title),
voluntary manslaughter (as described in section 1112 of such
title), or other offense relating to homicide (as described
in

[[Page H8574]]

chapter 51 of such title, sections 1113, 1114, 1116, 1118,
1119, 1120, and 1121).
(B) An offense relating to sexual abuse (as described in
chapter 109A of such title, sections 2241 through 2245), to
sexual exploitation or other abuse of children (as described
in chapter 110 of such title, sections 2251 through 2252), or
to transportation for illegal sexual activity (as described
in chapter 117 of such title, sections 2421, 2422, 2423, and
2425).
(C) An offense relating to peonage and slavery (as
described in chapter 77 of such title).
(D) Kidnapping (as defined in section 3559(c)(2)(E) of such
title).
(E) An offense involving robbery or burglary (as described
in chapter 103 of such title, sections 2111 through 2114,
2116, and 2118 through 2119).
(F) Any violation of section 1153 involving murder,
manslaughter, kidnapping, maiming, a felony offense relating
to sexual abuse (as described in chapter 109A), incest,
arson, burglary, or robbery.
(G) Any attempt or conspiracy to commit any of the above
offenses.
(2) The initial determination of qualifying Federal
offenses shall be made not later than 120 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act.
(e) Regulations.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), this
section shall be carried out under regulations prescribed by
the Attorney General.
(2) Probation officers.--The Director of the Administrative
Office of the United States Courts shall make available model
procedures for the activities of probation officers in
carrying out this section.
(f) Commencement of Collection.--Collection of DNA samples
under subsection (a) shall, subject to the availability of
appropriations, commence not later than the date that is 180
days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 4. COLLECTION AND USE OF DNA IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION
FROM CERTAIN DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OFFENDERS.

(a) Collection of DNA Samples.--
(1) From individuals in custody.--The Director of the
Bureau of Prisons shall collect a DNA sample from each
individual in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons who is, or
has been, convicted of a qualifying District of Columbia
offense (as determined under subsection (d)).
(2) From individuals on release, parole, or probation.--The
Director of the Court Services and Offender Supervision
Agency for the District of Columbia shall collect a DNA
sample from each individual under the supervision of the
Agency who is on supervised release, parole, or probation who
is, or has been, convicted of a qualifying District of
Columbia offense (as determined under subsection (d)).
(3) Individuals already in codis.--For each individual
described in paragraph (1) or (2), if the Combined DNA Index
System (in this section referred to as ``CODIS'') of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation contains a DNA analysis with
respect to that individual, the Director of the Bureau of
Prisons or Agency (as applicable) may (but need not) collect
a DNA sample from that individual.
(4) Collection procedures.--(A) The Director of the Bureau
of Prisons or Agency (as applicable) may use or authorize the
use of such means as are reasonably necessary to detain,
restrain, and collect a DNA sample from an individual who
refuses to cooperate in the collection of the sample.
(B) The Director of the Bureau of Prisons or Agency, as
appropriate, may enter into agreements with units of State or
local government or with private entities to provide for the
collection of the samples described in paragraph (1) or (2).
(5) Criminal penalty.--An individual from whom the
collection of a DNA sample is authorized under this
subsection who fails to cooperate in the collection of that
sample shall be--
(A) guilty of a class A misdemeanor; and
(B) punished in accordance with title 18, United States
Code.
(b) Analysis and Use of Samples.--The Director of the
Bureau of Prisons or Agency (as applicable) shall furnish
each DNA sample collected under subsection (a) to the
Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, who shall
carry out a DNA analysis on each such DNA sample and include
the results in CODIS.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``DNA sample'' means a tissue, fluid, or other
bodily sample of an individual on which a DNA analysis can be
carried out.
(2) The term ``DNA analysis'' means analysis of the
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) identification information in a
bodily sample.
(d) Qualifying District of Columbia Offenses.--The
Government of the District of Columbia may determine those
offenses under the District of Columbia Code that shall be
treated for purposes of this section as qualifying District
of Columbia offenses.
(e) Commencement of Collection.--Collection of DNA samples
under subsection (a) shall, subject to the availability of
appropriations, commence not later than the date that is 180
days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the Court Services and Offender
Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia to carry out
this section such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal
years 2001 through 2005.

SEC. 5. COLLECTION AND USE OF DNA IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION
FROM CERTAIN OFFENDERS IN THE ARMED FORCES.

(a) In General.--(1) Chapter 80 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``Sec. 1565. DNA identification information: collection from
certain offenders; use

``(a) Collection of DNA Samples.--(1) The Secretary
concerned shall collect a DNA sample from each member of the
armed forces under the Secretary's jurisdiction who is, or
has been, convicted of a qualifying military offense (as
determined under subsection (d)).
``(2) For each member described in paragraph (1), if the
Combined DNA Index System (in this section referred to as
`CODIS') of the Federal Bureau of Investigation contains a
DNA analysis with respect to that member, or if a DNA sample
has been or is to be collected from that member under section
3(a) of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000, the
Secretary concerned may (but need not) collect a DNA sample
from that member.
``(3) The Secretary concerned may enter into agreements
with other Federal agencies, units of State or local
government, or private entities to provide for the collection
of samples described in paragraph (1).
``(b) Analysis and Use of Samples.--The Secretary concerned
shall furnish each DNA sample collected under subsection (a)
to the Secretary of Defense. The Secretary of Defense shall--
(1) carry out a DNA analysis on each such DNA sample in a
manner that complies with the requirements for inclusion of
that analysis in CODIS; and
(2) furnish the results of each such analysis to the
Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation for inclusion
in CODIS.
``(c) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `DNA sample' means a tissue, fluid, or other
bodily sample of an individual on which a DNA analysis can be
carried out.
``(2) The term `DNA analysis' means analysis of the
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) identification information in a
bodily sample.
``(d) Qualifying Military Offenses.--(1) Subject to
paragraph (2), the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with
the Attorney General, shall determine those felony or sexual
offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice that
shall be treated for purposes of this section as qualifying
military offenses.
``(2) An offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice
that is comparable to a qualifying Federal offense (as
determined under section 3(d) of the DNA Analysis Backlog
Elimination Act of 2000), as determined by the Secretary in
consultation with the Attorney General, shall be treated for
purposes of this section as a qualifying military offense.
``(e) Expungement.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall
promptly expunge, from the index described in subsection (a)
of section 210304 of the Violent Crime Control and Law
Enforcement Act of 1994, the DNA analysis of a person
included in the index on the basis of a qualifying military
offense if the Secretary receives, for each conviction of the
person of a qualifying offense, a certified copy of a final
court order establishing that such conviction has been
overturned.
``(2) For purposes of paragraph (1), the term `qualifying
offense' means any of the following offenses:
``(A) A qualifying Federal offense, as determined under
section 3 of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of
2000.
``(B) A qualifying District of Columbia offense, as
determined under section 4 of the DNA Analysis Backlog
Elimination Act of 2000.
``(C) A qualifying military offense.
``(3) For purposes of paragraph (1), a court order is not
`final' if time remains for an appeal or application for
discretionary review with respect to the order.
``(f) Regulations.--This section shall be carried out under
regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Secretary of Transportation and the
Attorney General. Those regulations shall apply, to the
extent practicable, uniformly throughout the armed forces.''.
(2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter
is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``1565. DNA identification information: collection from certain
offenders; use.''.
(b) Initial Determination of Qualifying Military
Offenses.--The initial determination of qualifying military
offenses under section 1565(d) of title 10, United States
Code, as added by subsection (a)(1), shall be made not later
than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Commencement of Collection.--Collection of DNA samples
under section 1565(a) of such title, as added by subsection
(a)(1), shall, subject to the availability of appropriations,
commence not later than the date that is 60 days after the
date of the initial determination referred to in subsection
(b).

SEC. 6. EXPANSION OF DNA IDENTIFICATION INDEX.

(a) Use of Certain Funds.--Section 811(a)(2) of the
Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (28
U.S.C. 531 note) is amended to read as follows:

[[Page H8575]]

``(2) the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
shall expand the combined DNA Identification System (CODIS)
to include analyses of DNA samples collected from--
``(A) individuals convicted of a qualifying Federal
offense, as determined under section 3(d) of the DNA Analysis
Backlog Elimination Act of 2000;
``(B) individuals convicted of a qualifying District of
Columbia offense, as determined under section 4(d) of the DNA
Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000; and
``(C) members of the Armed Forces convicted of a qualifying
military offense, as determined under section 1565(d) of
title 10, United States Code.''.
(b) Index To Facilitate Law Enforcement Exchange of DNA
Identification Information.--Section 210304 of the Violent
Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C.
14132) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(1), by inserting after ``criminal
justice agency'' the following: ``(or the Secretary of
Defense in accordance with section 1565 of title 10, United
States Code)'';
(2) in subsection (b)(2), by striking ``, at regular
intervals of not to exceed 180 days,'' and inserting
``semiannual'';
(3) in subsection (b)(3), by inserting after ``criminal
justice agencies'' in the matter preceding subparagraph (A)
the following: ``(or the Secretary of Defense in accordance
with section 1565 of title 10, United States Code)''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) Expungement of Records.--
``(1) By director.--(A) The Director of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation shall promptly expunge from the index
described in subsection (a) the DNA analysis of a person
included in the index on the basis of a qualifying Federal
offense or a qualifying District of Columbia offense (as
determined under section 3 and 4 of the DNA Analysis Backlog
Elimination Act of 2000, respectively) if the Director
receives, for each conviction of the person of a qualifying
offense, a certified copy of a final court order establishing
that such conviction has been overturned.
``(B) For purposes of subparagraph (A), the term
`qualifying offense' means any of the following offenses:
``(i) A qualifying Federal offense, as determined under
section 3 of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of
2000.
``(ii) A qualifying District of Columbia offense, as
determined under section 4 of the DNA Analysis Backlog
Elimination Act of 2000.
``(iii) A qualifying military offense, as determined under
section 1565 of title 10, United States Code.
``(C) For purposes of subparagraph (A), a court order is
not `final' if time remains for an appeal or application for
discretionary review with respect to the order.
``(2) By states.--(A) As a condition of access to the index
described in subsection (a), a State shall promptly expunge
from that index the DNA analysis of a person included in the
index by that State if the responsible agency or official of
that State receives, for each conviction of the person of an
offense on the basis of which that analysis was or could have
been included in the index, a certified copy of a final court
order establishing that such conviction has been overturned.
``(B) For purposes of subparagraph (A), a court order is
not `final' if time remains for an appeal or application for
discretionary review with respect to the order.''.

SEC. 7. CONDITIONS OF RELEASE.

(a) Conditions of Probation.--Section 3563(a) of title 18,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (7), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (8), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (8) the following:
``(9) that the defendant cooperate in the collection of a
DNA sample from the defendant if the collection of such a
sample is authorized pursuant to section 3 of the DNA
Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000.''.
(b) Conditions of Supervised Release.--Section 3583(d) of
title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting before
``The court shall also order'' the following: ``The court
shall order, as an explicit condition of supervised release,
that the defendant cooperate in the collection of a DNA
sample from the defendant, if the collection of such a sample
is authorized pursuant to section 3 of the DNA Analysis
Backlog Elimination Act of 2000.''.
(c) Conditions of Parole.--Section 4209 of title 18, United
States Code, insofar as such section remains in effect with
respect to certain individuals, is amended by inserting
before ``In every case, the Commission shall also impose''
the following: ``In every case, the Commission shall impose
as a condition of parole that the parolee cooperate in the
collection of a DNA sample from the parolee, if the
collection of such a sample is authorized pursuant to section
3 or section 4 of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of
2000 or section 1565 of title 10.''.
(d) Conditions of Release Generally.--If the collection of
a DNA sample from an individual on probation, parole, or
supervised release is authorized pursuant to section 3 or 4
of this Act or section 1565 of title 10, United States Code,
the individual shall cooperate in the collection of a DNA
sample as a condition of that probation, parole, or
supervised release.

SEC. 8. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

(a) Drug Control and System Improvement Grants.--Section
503(a)(12)(C) of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and
Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3753(a)(12)(C)) is
amended by striking ``, at regular intervals of not to exceed
180 days,'' and inserting ``semiannual''.
(b) DNA Identification Grants.--Section 2403(3) of title I
of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42
U.S.C. 3796kk-2(3)) is amended by striking ``, at regular
intervals not exceeding 180 days,'' and inserting
``semiannual''.
(c) Federal Bureau of Investigation.--Section
210305(a)(1)(A) of the Violent Crime Control and Law
Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14133(a)(1)(A)) is amended
by striking ``, at regular intervals of not to exceed 180
days,'' and inserting ``semiannual''.

SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Attorney
General to carry out this Act (including to reimburse the
Federal judiciary for any reasonable costs incurred in
implementing such Act, as determined by the Attorney General)
such sums as may be necessary.

SEC. 10. PRIVACY PROTECTION STANDARDS.

(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), any
sample collected under, or any result of any analysis carried
out under, section 2, 3, or 4 may be used only for a purpose
specified in such section.
(b) Permissive Uses.--A sample or result described in
subsection (a) may be disclosed under the circumstances under
which disclosure of information included in the Combined DNA
Index System is allowed, as specified in subparagraphs (A)
through (D) of section 210304(b)(3) of the Violent Crime
Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C.
14132(b)(3)).
(c) Criminal Penalty.--A person who knowingly--
(1) discloses a sample or result described in subsection
(a) in any manner to any person not authorized to receive it;
or
(2) obtains, without authorization, a sample or result
described in subsection (a),
shall be fined not more than $100,000.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Canady) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Canady).

General Leave

Mr. CANADY of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend
their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 4640.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
Mr. CANADY of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4640, the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act, was
introduced by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) together with
the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) the ranking minority member,
the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Weiner), and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) to address an
important problem, the massive backlog of biological samples awaiting
DNA analysis in the States.
According to the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics,
approximately 69 percent of publicly operated forensic crime labs
across the country have a backlog of unprocessed samples awaiting DNA
analysis. While we do not have solid numbers for the total of crime
scene and victim samples awaiting analysis, some estimates run into the
tens of thousands.
We do know that the backlog of unprocessed samples taken from
convicted offenders is nearing 300,000. Even the FBI's own crime lab in
Washington has a backlog of samples awaiting DNA analysis.
Our bill addresses this problem by authorizing funding to eliminate
the backlog. States seeking funding under the program created by the
bill will be required to make application for this funding through the
Justice Department's Office of Justice Programs. States seeking these
funds will be required to develop and submit to that office a
comprehensive plan to eliminate any backlog of samples awaiting DNA
analysis.
Many of the samples analyzed will be loaded into the FBI's Combined
DNA Index System, known as ``CODIS,'' a national compute database
authorized by Congress in 1994. The purpose of this database is to
match DNA samples from crime scenes where there are no suspects with
the DNA of convicted offenders.

[[Page H8576]]

Clearly, the more samples we have in the system, the greater the
likelihood we will come up with matches and solve cases.
One glaring omission in the law that authorized CODIS is that it did
not authorize the taking of DNA samples from persons convicted of
Federal offenses, District of Columbia offences, and offenses under the
Uniform Code of Military Justice. H.R. 4640 will correct that omission.
The offenses triggering the sample requirement for Federal and military
offenders are specified in the bill and consistent of a number of
felony crimes, most involving violence or sex offenses.
The bill leaves it to the District of Columbia government to
determine those offenses that will trigger the sample requirement under
District of Columbia law. Also, as amended, the bill requires that
samples of offenders whose convictions are overturned be removed from
the CODIS database. This will be the requirement regardless of whether
the offender was convicted of a Federal or State crime.
H.R. 4640 is similar to three bills introduced by the gentleman from
Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner)
and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), all three of which were
the subject of a hearing before the Subcommittee on Crime on March 23,
2000. The bill before us today builds on the foundation laid by those
bills, and I am pleased that the sponsors of those bills are original
cosponsors of H.R. 4640.
As this bill has moved through the committee, it has been approved by
amendments on both sides. The result is a very good bill, and I am
pleased that this bill is the product of that bipartisan cooperation.
I am also pleased to inform my colleagues that H.R. 4640 is supported
by the administration, the Federal Law Enforcement Officers
Association, and the Fraternal Order of Police.
I want to particularly acknowledge the leadership of the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. McCollum) the chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime,
on this important legislation. He has really made it possible for us to
bring this legislation forward here today.
I also want to particularly thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Scott) the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Crime, for all of his
help in crafting the legislation and for being an original cosponsor of
the bill which is before the House now.
I urge all of my colleagues to support this important legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the DNA Analysis Backlog
Elimination Act of 2000. This bill represents a compilation of the fine
effort by several of our colleagues to address the DNA analysis backlog
that has accumulated at laboratories all over the country.
Earlier we conducted in the Subcommittee on Crime hearings on three
DNA backlog elimination bills introduced by the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Gilman), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak), the gentleman
from Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy) and members of the Committee on the
Judiciary, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner) and the gentleman
from Ohio (Mr. Chabot).
Elimination of the DNA analysis backlog would be a significant step
forward in having our criminal justice system more accurately dispense
justice. Not only will it greatly enhance the efficiency and
effectiveness of our criminal justice systems throughout the country,
but it would also save lives by allowing apprehension and detention of
dangerous individuals while eliminating the prospects that innocent
individuals would be wrongly held for crimes that they did not commit.
At the same time, I think it is important to recognize that with this
expansion comes the increased likelihood that DNA samples and analyses
may be misused. We must be ever mindful of our responsibility to
protect the privacy of this DNA information, ensuring that it be used
only for law enforcement purposes.
To that end, I was pleased that the Committee on the Judiciary agreed
to an amendment that would impose criminal penalties for anyone who
uses DNA samples or analyses for purposes not designated by the law
enforcement officials.
I am also grateful that the majority provided for the expungement of
DNA information on individuals whose convictions have been overturned
on appeal.
In addition to the criminal penalties for misuse of DNA, I believe
that we should encourage each State to develop a specific security
protocol to prevent misuse of such samples, since the DNA does include
sensitive personal information. This approach will be the only way to
ensure that DNA analysis will not be used for unlawful purposes.
This legislation is a positive step for law enforcement, but I am
disappointed that it does not include any requirement on States to
provide access to DNA testing to convicted persons who did not have the
opportunity for DNA testing at the time of their trial. I am hoping
that the next Congress will consider additional legislation which would
ensure that funds provided for H.R. 4640 might be made available to
provide persons who want to prove that they were wrongfully convicted.
Nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, I am very aware of the benefits of this
legislation. In fact, through his outstanding work in Virginia, Dr.
Paul B. Ferrara, Virginia's Director of the Division of Forensic
Sciences, has led efforts in this country on the use of DNA for
criminal justice purposes. That is why I am pleased to be a cosponsor
of this legislation and urge my colleagues to support the bill.
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the U.S. House is today
taking up the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 bill. I
originally introduced a bill addressing the DNA backlog problem with my
colleagues Mr. Gilman and Mr. Ramstad in November 1999. I am so pleased
to support this bill on suspension today, as this body acts to bring
desperately needed help to our law enforcement during these waning days
of the 106th Congress.
This help does not come a moment too soon.
I would like to thank Mr. McCollum, Mr. Scott, Mr. Chabot, Mr. Weiner
and Mr. Kennedy and all the other Judiciary Committee members who
devoted their time and energy to move this important issue to the
forefront. This bill would not be on the floor today without the hard
work of these members, who held hearings and worked to craft this joint
legislation.
This bill helps states and the FBI take a giant step in the fight
against crime by eliminating the national backlog of DNA records.
Federal, state and local law enforcement will be more connected, and
better able to work together to solve crimes. It also closes
significant loopholes that currently exist whereby the DNA samples of
federal, military and District of Columbia serious offenders are not
being collected. Lastly, it contains important privacy and expungement
provisions, so that the rights of individual are protected as well.
Right now, state and local police departments cannot deal with the
number of DNA samples from convicted offenders and unsolved crimes.
These states simply do not have enough time, money, or resources to
test and record these samples.
According to the Detroit Free Press, as of May 2000, Michigan has
collected 15,000 blood samples from sex offenders since 1991, but state
police have so far only run DNA analysis on 500 of them! This is truly
frightening.
Unanalyzed and unrecorded DNA samples are useless to law enforcement
and to criminal investigations. Let me illustrate why we need these
samples tested and recorded, why we need this bill.
John Doe is a convicted offender serving time for a sexual assault.
By law, his DNA has been collected, but because of the backlog, it has
not been tested and is not in the law enforcement database. John Doe
gets out of jail, he commits another sexual assault, and gets away,
unidentified by the victim.
Even if the police collect his DNA from the subsequent crime scene,
he will not be caught, and his DNA will not be matched up, because his
previous DNA sample is sitting on a shelf, still waiting to be tested.
In Michigan, his sample would be sitting with the almost 15,000 other
samples--untested and therefore useless.
John Doe will stay on the streets, and he will commit more crimes.
This bill does not come a moment too soon, every day that goes by, a
real John Doe is out there, committing more rapes, robberies, murders,
when he could have been stopped.
This bill also ensures that the DNA samples of federal, District of
Columbia, and military offenders are analyzed. The broader the database
police have to work with, the better their ability to solve unsolved
crimes and prevent future ones.

[[Page H8577]]

Because of this bill, you will see the number of unsolved cases go
down, and you might see some people freed from jail, exonerated by the
new DNA records available. It opens a door to better all around law
enforcement and criminal investigation.
We are answering the call for help by police, communities, and
victims, and it will save lives. This bill finally strikes back at
criminals that until now have been able to strike and strike again and
again at our society without being caught.
Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank, Mr.
McCollum, Mr. Scott, and the other Members of the Judiciary Committee
for their hard work on this important crime issue.
In September of last year, I introduced, along with Congressman
Chabot and Congressman Visclosky, The Violent Offender DNA
Identification Act of 1999, H.R. 2810.
This bipartisan measure is the predecessor bill to H.R. 4640, which I
also was proud to cosponsor.
These bills will put more criminals behind bars by correcting
practical and legal obstacles that leave crucial DNA evidence unused
and too many violent crimes unsolved.
Every week we hear stories about DNA evidence. Whether it is a
prisoner on death row for a crime he didn't commit who is released by
DNA evidence or a criminal suspect finally brought to justice using DNA
evidence, DNA is making headlines.
Currently, all 50 states require DNA samples to be obtained from
certain convicted offenders, and these samples can be shared through a
national data base known as CODIS.
The data base is installed in over ninety laboratories and nearly
five hundred thousand samples are classified and stored in it.
To date, the FBI has recorded hundreds of matches through DNA data
bases, helping solve numerous crimes. As valuable as this system is, it
is not being utilized effectively. The problems with the current system
include backlog and jurisdiction.
The FBI estimates that there are several hundred thousand DNA samples
that have been collected, but still need to be analyzed.
In my State of Rhode Island, the DNA collection began only a year and
one half ago, but already there is a backlog of a hundred samples.
Today's bipartisan bill, which was crafted with input from
organizations including the FBI and the ACLU, would address this
backlog problem and ensure that more crimes will be solved through the
matching of DNA evidence.
The bill does two critical things. First, it provides one hundred and
seventy million dollars in grants to eliminate the backlog to states to
increase their capability to perform DNA analysis. Second, the bill
allows Federal, Military and District of Columbia law enforcement
agencies to collect DNA evidence.
Under current law, Federal Courts and the local courts of the
District of Columbia do not have this ability.
The Federal Courts and the District of Columbia have indicated their
support for the ability to conduct testing as states do.
From my home State of Rhode Island, I have heard from lab experts and
local law enforcement leaders on the need for this legislation.
It is clear that law enforcement supports legislation in this area.
And it is our job in Congress to balance this law enforcement need with
the privacy needs of our citizens.
Recently, Congress has been very active on the DNA backlog issue.
I strongly feel that H.R. 4640, however, is the most effective piece
of legislation on this topic because it has several provisions to
guarantee civil liberties, excludes juveniles from this database and
provides for the automatic right to expungement of a sample if a
conviction is overturned.
The main sponsors of H.R. 4640, particularly the Ranking Member of
the Crime Subcommittee, Mr. Scott, worked extensively with the ACLU to
address many of their concerns, while taking our underlying model for
the bill from the FBIs recommendations.
I feel strongly, that there are several areas of H.R. 4640 that could
have been improved upon--including the clear prohibition on the use of
funds for arrestee testing, and more specific requirements on States to
provide DNA testing to convicted persons who did not have access at the
time of their trial.
But, overall this bill has been crafted with the careful and
attentive work of both sides of the aisle, in the hopes that it may be
further improved during a conference with the other body.
In a bipartisan fashion, we attended to many civil liberty concerns
and, therefore, narrowed the types of crimes covered, mandated stricter
protocols for the use of DNA, and excluded juvenile offenders.
In this process, we came up with a bill that all members of the House
can support.
Violent criminals should not be able to evade arrest simply because a
state didn't analyze its DNA samples or because an inexcusable loophole
leaves Federal and D.C. offenders out of the DNA data base.
We have the technology to revolutionize law enforcement and forensic
science and the key to unlock the door of unsolved crimes--we must use
this capacity and make these goals a reality.
Lastly, I want to recognize the hard work of several staffers who
were integral in bringing this bill to the floor, most notably. Mr.
Bobby Vassar, Minority Counsel for the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Glenn
Schmitt with the Majority staff, and Ms. Elizabeth Treanor, Counsel for
Mr. Chabot.
I urge all of my colleagues to support the ``DNA Analysis Backlog
Elimination Act.''
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my gratitude to
Chairman McCollum for his dedication and diligence in bringing H.R.
4640, the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act, to the floor today, and
am pleased that this legislation reflects many of the provisions
outlined in my measure, H.R. 3375, the Convicted Offender DNA Index
System Support Act. I've had the pleasure of working closely with him,
Ranking Member Scott, and Representatives Ramstad, Stupak, Kennedy,
Weiner, and Chabot, in developing this legislation, which will meet the
needs of prosecutors, law enforcement, and victims throughout our
Nation.
Mr. Speaker, in 1994, the Congress passed the DNA Identification Act,
which authorized the construction of the Combined DNA Index System, or
CODIS, to assist our Federal, State and local law enforcement agencies
in fighting violent crime throughout the Nation. CODIS is a master
database for all law enforcement agencies to submit and retrieve DNA
samples of convicted violent offenders. Since beginning its operation
in 1998, the system has worked extremely well in assisting law
enforcement by matching DNA evidence with possible suspects and has
accounted for the capture of over 200 suspects in unsolved violent
crimes.
However, because of the high volume of convicted offender samples
needed to be analyzed, a nationwide backlog of approximately 600,000
unanalyzed convicted offender DNA samples has formed. Furthermore,
because the program has been so vital in assisting crime fighting and
prevention efforts, our States are expanding their collection efforts.
Recently, New York State Governor George Pataki enacted legislation to
expand N.Y. State's collection of DNA samples to require all violent
felons and a number of non-violent felony offenders, and, earlier this
year, the use of the expanded system resulted in charges being filed in
a 20-year-old Westchester County murder.
State forensic laboratories have also accumulated a backlog of
evidence for cases for which there are no suspects. These are evidence
``kits'' for unsolved violent crimes which are stored away because our
State forensic laboratories do not have the support necessary to
analyze them and compare the evidence to our nationwide data bank.
Presently, there are approximately 12,000 rape cases in New York City
alone, and, it is estimated, approximately 180,000 rape cases
nationwide, which are unsolved and unanalyzed. This number represents a
dismal future for the success for CODIS and reflects the growing
problem facing our law enforcement community. The DNA Analysis Backlog
Elimination Act will provide States with the support necessary to
combat these growing backlogs. The successful elimination of both the
convicted violent offender backlog and the unsolved casework backlog
will play a major role in the future of out State's crime prevention
and law enforcement efforts.
The DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act will also provide funding to
the Federal Bureau of Investigation to eliminate their unsolved
casework backlog and close a loophole created by the original
legislation. Although all 50 states require DNA collection from
designated convicted offenders, for some inexplicable reason, convicted
Federal, District of Columbia and Military offenders are exempt. H.R.
4640 closes that loophole by requiring the collection of samples from
any Federal, Military, or D.C. offender convicted of a violent crime.
Mr. Speaker, as you are aware, our Nation's fight against crime is
never over. Every day, the use of DNA evidence is becoming a more
important tool to our nation's law enforcement in solving crimes,
convicting the guilty and exonerating the innocent. The Justice
Department estimates that erasing the convicted offender backlog
nationwide could resolve at least 600 cases. The true amount of
unsolved cases, both State and Federal, which may be concluded through
the elimination of the both backlogs is unknown. However, if one more
case is solved and one more violent offender is detained because of our
efforts, we have succeeded.
In conclusion, we must ensure that our nation's law enforcement has
the equipment and support necessary to fight violent crime and protect
our communities. The DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act will assist
our local,

[[Page H8578]]

State and Federal law enforcement personnel by ensuring that crucial
resources are provided to our DNA data-banks and crime laboratories.
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of
H.R. 4640, which would assist the states in reducing the backlog of DNA
samples that have been collected from convicted offenders and crime
scenes.
Recent reports indicate that in my own home state of California there
are more than 100,000 unprocessed DNA samples. Even using the state's
most optimistic projections, it will take two years to clear that
backlog.
Many states are similarly situated. Mired with both funding and
collection problems, the U.S. solves far fewer crimes with DNA. But,
the potential for improvement is great. While the U.S. may never match
Great Britain, which has a long-established DNA database and is
reported to crack 300 to 500 cases a week, reducing the backlog of DNA
samples will provide both law enforcement with an increasingly
important investigative and prosecutorial tool.
H.R. 4640 addresses the backlog by providing a series of grants to
assist the states in processing DNA samples collected from violent
offenders and samples collected from crime scenes and victims of crime.
Specifically, the bill authorizes $15 million a year in grants for the
next three years to process convicted offender DNA samples. In
addition, it provides $25 million to reduce the backlog of crime scene
samples, an intrinsically more expensive processing, by both expanding
state laboratory facilities and allowing states to contract with
private labs.
As important, the bill closes a loophole that has existed with
respect to individuals convicted of violent federal crimes and held in
federal facilities. Currently, there is no requirement that DNA samples
be taken from persons convicted of certain federal crimes. H.R. 4640
fixes this oversight. Of particular interest to me is the bill's
requirement that DNA be collected from individuals convicted of violent
and sexual offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
I authored a similar provision in the House-passed FY01 National
Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 4205). That language required the
Department of Defense to collect, process and analyze DNA
identification information from violent and sexual offenders and to
provide that information to the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS),
national registry of DNA samples. Currently, the Department is not
required to collect DNA samples from individuals convicted of
qualifying UCMJ offenses.
There is clearly a need to close this loophole. In calendar year
1999, the total number of prisoners under confinement within the
Department of Defense correctional facilities for terms other than life
or a sentence of death was 963. Of those, 51.5% were confined because
of violent and sexual offenses, the kind of offenses for which both
H.R. 4640 and H.R. 4205 would require the DoD to collect DNA samples.
Under both bills, the DoD would collect, process and analyze DNA
samples and provide them to the CODIS database.

Several statistics about the characteristics of the civilian prison
population underscore the importance of closing this loophole.
While the number of veterans in the prison facilities nationwide
declined as a percentage of the total prison population between 1985
and 1998, the absolute number rose 46%, from 154,600 to 225,700.
According to the most recent data available (1997), a majority (55%) of
veterans was sentenced for a violent offense (compared to 46% for non-
veterans). And, veterans were twice as likely as non-veterans to be
sentenced for a sexual assault, including rape (18% versus 7%).
The data do not answer precisely the question of how many veterans
have a prior conviction as a member of the Armed Forces before a
subsequent contact with the federal, state or local criminal justice
system. However, the data show that 13.8% of the veterans in local
jails, 17.4% of veterans in state prison, and 14.9% of veterans in
federal prison were not honorably discharged. Many of these veterans
had more serious criminal histories than those incarcerated veterans
who had been honorably discharged. In fact, 43% of veterans not
honorably discharged had at least three prior sentences, compared to
36% of those honorably discharged.
These data support the argument for imposing on the Department of
Defense the requirement to collect DNA samples from service members
convicted of a qualifying violent or sexual offense. By requiring the
collection of DNA, it is likely that service members convicted of a
qualifying UCMJ offense may be more readily identified, and quite
possibly cleared, should they be suspected of perpetrating a violent
crime as a civilian.
I strongly support H.R. 4640. It makes major strides in assisting the
states in reducing the DNA backlog and in closing a loophole by which
DNA samples from certain federal prisoners was not collected nor added
to the national DNA database.
I urge passage of the bill.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I want to extend my gratitude
to my colleagues who are interested in providing the fairest possible
procedures in the application of the death penalty, the most serious
punishment in the criminal justice system.
Much progress has been made since the recent mark-up session
regarding this bill. In general, H.R. 4640 provides for the collection
and use of DNA identification information from individuals convicted of
a qualifying violent or sexual offense under the Federal code, UCMJ, or
District of Columbia Code.
DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid), a high tech genetic fingerprint, was
first introduced into evidence in a United States court in 1986. After
surviving many court challenges, DNA evidence is now admitted in all
United States jurisdictions. In fact, it has become the predominant
forensic technique for identifying criminals when biological issues are
left at a crime scene.
In the Violent Crime Control and Law Act of 1994 (1994 Crime Bill),
Congress authorized the FBI to create a national index of DNA samples
taken from convicted offenders, crime scenes and victims, and
unidentified human remains. This was a crucial step forward because DNA
has played such a significant role in our criminal justice system.
In response, the FBI established the Combined DNA index System
(CODIS). CODIS allows State and local forensic laboratories to exchange
and compare DNA profiles electronically in an attempt to link evidence
from crime scenes for which there are no suspects to DNA samples on
file in the system. Today, CODIS is well established across the nation.
All fifty states have enacted statutes requiring certain convicted
offenders to provide DNA samples for analysis and entry into the CODIS
system. Nevertheless, it is important to point out that samples from
persons convicted of federal crimes, crimes under the District of
Columbia code, or offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice
(UCMJ), are not presently being taken because there is no statutory
authority to do so.
In addition, the Department of Justice's Bureau of Statistics (BJA)
reports that as of December 1997, approximately 60 percent of the
publicly operated forensic crime labs across the country reported a DNA
backlog totaling 6,800 unprocessed DNA case samples and an additional
287,000 unprocessed convicted offender samples. While I am encouraged
that forensic labs have responded by hiring additional staff and
increasing overtime, Congress has merely appropriated $30 million
toward solving the problem. Like some of my colleagues, I am concerned
that the backlog continues to grow without adequate resources.
To qualify for funding under this legislation, a state must develop a
plan to eliminate any backlog of samples and federal funding under the
program may be awarded for up to 75 percent of the cost of the states
plan. This is an important step forward in the use of DNA evidence in
our federal courts.
I also believe that this legislation would ensure the collection and
use of DNA identification information in CODIS from persons convicted
of a qualifying violent or sexual offense under the federal code, UCMJ,
or District of Columbia Code. Indeed, technical revisions have been
made to the preliminary legislation that only strengthen the bill's
application several offenses.
It is crucial for defendants to have access to the CODIS system in
circumstances that possibly establish innocence. This is particularly
important, for instance, in the growing number of capital cases where
DNA identification information make a crucial difference.
Reducing the backlog regarding DNA identification information in
federal courts is very important for our criminal justice system. To
the extent that this legislation helps to eliminate the backlog through
these grants, we can work towards establishing a more reliable justice
system.
Mrs. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CANADY of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Canady) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 4640, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________