Segment 2 Of 2 Previous Hearing Segment(1)
SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 158 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 CRIMINAL LAW COMPONENTS AT MAIN JUSTICE
TUESDAY, MAY 15, 2001
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Crime,
Committee on the Judiciary,
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 4:03 p.m., in Room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Mr. SMITH. The Subcommittee on Crime will now come to order.
I am going to recognize myself for purposes of an opening statement, and then I recognize Mr. Scott of Virginia for his opening statement as well, and then we will look forward to hearing from our three witnesses today.
The Subcommittee on Crime today holds the second of two hearings on the reauthorization of the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice was last reauthorized by Congress in 1980. Since then, there have been no complete examinations of the authorities under which the department operates.
Events from last week remind us why it is important for this Subcommittee to exercise its oversight responsibilities. The Subcommittee on Crime is charged with oversight of seven of the Department of Justice components.
Page 159 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The Subcommittee's first hearing held on May 3 featured four law enforcement agencies of the Department of Justicethe FBI, the DEA, U.S. Marshal Service, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Today's hearing focuses on the remaining three criminal law components of the Justice Department. They are the Criminal Division, the Office of Justice Programs, and the Community Oriented Policing Services Office, better known as COPS.
The Criminal Division was created in 1919 and is responsible for developing, enforcing, and supervising the application of all Federal criminal laws except those specifically assigned to other divisions. The division has the responsibility of overseeing criminal matters under more than 900 statutes. In addition to its direct litigation responsibility, the division formulates and implements criminal law enforcement policy and provides legal advice and assistance for Federal prosecutors and investigative agencies.
The Office of Justice Programs was established in 1984 to provide Federal leadership, coordination, and assistance to make the nation's justice system more efficient and effective in preventing and controlling crime. Through programs developed and funded by its bureaus and offices, OJP works to form partnerships among Federal, State, and local government officials to reduce and prevent crime, improve the administration of justice in America, and meet the needs of crime victims.
The Community Oriented Policing Services Office was created by the Department of Justice to carry out the community policing grants program in the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. The goal of the COPS program was to promote community policing and add 100,000 new officers on the street by the end of the year 2000. The COPS mission is to improve public safety in neighborhoods and communities throughout the country by building partnerships with communities, police agencies, and other public and private organizations.
Page 160 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Today's witnesses oversee some of the most significant components of our nation's criminal justice system since guarding public safety is one of the government's most essential duties. We look forward to hearing from the witnesses about the challenges they face and the ways in which Congress can help them accomplish their goals.
Now that concludes my opening statement, and the gentleman from Virginia is recognized for his.
Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm pleased to join you in convening this continuing series of hearings on reauthorization of the Department of Justice criminal law enforcement components.
It is interesting that we haven't had an oversight hearing like this because the department has been without authorization, as I understand it, for about 20 years.
Today we will hear from the department, the various offices, Office of Justice Programs, the Criminal Division and the COPS program, all of which play important roles in the Federal Government's effort to assist local and State governments to prevent, prosecute, and reduce crime.
Since over 98 percent of crime which occurs in this country is within the jurisdiction of States and localities, a review of major entities in DOJ which assist them is clearly in order.
Page 161 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 I'd start by indicating that I've heard from more than one criminal justice consortium that they are generally very well-satisfied with the research priorities and support offered by OJP. We told them we wouldn't tell anybody if they told us the truth, and they still said that they were very satisfied.
We've also heard the COPS program has been very successful, particularly because it is administered with a lot less bureaucratic hassle and delay than most government programs have to deal with.
While I've heard that the Criminal Division has been very successful in its efforts, I've heard quite a bit about the growing federalization of minor street crime and the impact on minorities as a result of that effort. I can scarcely point the finger at the Criminal Division since much of the concentration on minor criminal activity is driven by policies in Congress, all too often by the political whims of the day.
The concern about federalization has been echoed from the left and the right. It includes a clarion call from the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court that we have to rethink the use of our Federal resources. Yet we still seem to be federalizing more street crime.
We heard the announcement yesterday of the president's nationwide Project Exile Program, which has been criticized in my jurisdiction by the Federal judges who said it turned their Federal courts into police courtsso I can hardly blame the Criminal Division for its concentration, although you can count on me to continue to criticize it.
I hope that we will take a close look at this overextension into the street crime area, which is traditionally exclusively a State and local matter.
Page 162 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
So I look forward to the testimony of the witness and to discussing areas of mutual concern.
And again, thank you for convening the hearing.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Scott.
The gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Coble, is recognized for his opening statement.
Mr. COBLE. I will please you, Mr. Chairman, and say to you, I have no opening statement, but it's good to have our witnesses with us.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Coble.
We will go to those witnesses, all of whom are from the Department of Justice today, and I will introduce them. They are Michael Horowitz, chief of staff, Criminal Division; Mary Lou Leary, acting assistant attorney general, Office of Justice Programs; and Ralph J. Justus, acting director, Community Oriented Policing Services, or COPS. We welcome you all, and we will begin with Mr. Horowitz.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL HOROWITZ, CHIEF OF STAFF, CRIMINAL DIVISION
Page 163 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 Mr. HOROWITZ. Chairman Smith, Ranking Minority Congressman Scott, Members of the Subcommittee, I am pleased to appear before you today to describe the activities of the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice. With your permission, I would like to begin with a brief statement and would ask that my full statement be submitted into the record. I presently serve as the chief of staff
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Horowitz, let me interrupt you very quickly to say that the opening statements of all the witnesses will be made a part of the record. And I noticed yours was 39 pages long, so we're particularly happy to make your entire statement a part of the record.
Mr. HOROWITZ. I want to avoid a filibuster here. [Laughter.]
Mr. SMITH. Please proceed.
Mr. HOROWITZ. As you indicated, I presently serve as chief of staff in the Criminal Division. I have been a Federal prosecutor for the past 10 years, having served as a supervisor and line attorney in the United States Attorneys Office for the Southern District of New York, and I'm proud to have worked in the Criminal Division since January 1999.
I would like to outline for you briefly the division's unique role within the Department of Justice and Federal law enforcement. The mission of the Criminal Division is to work cooperatively with United States attorneys and State and local law enforcement to deter criminal activity and to ensure that violations of Federal criminal law are properly and vigorously pursued.
Page 164 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The Criminal Division has responsibility for overseeing the enforcement, as you indicated, Mr. Chairman, of more than 900 Federal criminal statutes and advises the attorney general in setting and developing Federal law enforcement priorities and policies. Additionally, the division develops policies, procedures, tools, and training on prosecution techniques to improve the nation's crime-fighting capabilities.
One of the most important and growing areas of responsibility for the Criminal Division involves international law enforcement coordination. As international crime increases with the expansion of the Internet and the relative ease of international travel, the division has been hard at work to develop effective strategies to combat it.
For example, the Criminal Division is responsible for providing assistance to Federal, State, and local prosecutors and obtaining evidence from foreign governments. The division works with our foreign counterparts to develop legal assistance relations and partnerships and to strengthen foreign law enforcement institutions.
The effort by the division's Office of International Affairs to significantly expand the number of Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties has resulted in the growing exchange of evidence and the production of witnesses that leads to successful prosecutions, and it is responsible for the recovery of hundreds of millions of dollars in drug and fraud proceeds.
Similarly, the expanding network of extradition treaties form the basis for retrieving or returning defendants to the country where they can be most effectively prosecuted.
Page 165 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Another important area of Criminal Division responsibility involves training. For example, the division's Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section has provided extensive training and practice manuals to Federal prosecutors and investigators regarding the investigation and prosecution of computer crime. In addition, the division provides special prosecutorial experience on a wide range of issues, including sensitive law enforcement areas such as title III electronic surveillance matters and the issuance of attorney subpoenas.
An example is the expertise developed by our Terrorism and Violent Crime Section relating to terrorism cases. Because of their expertise, the section directly participates in the investigation and prosecution of virtually all international terrorism cases and particularly critical domestic terrorism cases.
Further, it is the responsibility of the Criminal Division to address emerging crimefor example, computer crime and cyberterrorismby providing personal support and resources if necessary.
As you know, communications networks, especially the Internet, link governments, businesses, and individuals in the same interconnected digital system. These networks offer great benefits but also provide an easy way to reach within our borders to combat criminal acts.
In this developing environment, the division's Computer Crimes and Intellectual Property Section and the Terrorism and Violent Crime Section work toward preparing and equipping law enforcement to investigate cybercrime and to prevent cyberterrorism.
Page 166 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Increasingly, the type of cybercrime most likely to cause significant harm to consumers and businesses here and abroad is fraud over the Internet. Since 1999, the Fraud Section has overseen a comprehensive Internet fraud initiative that the department established to provide a coordinated approach to combating Internet fraud.
Another area where the Criminal Division plays a critical role is the coordination of complex, multijurisdictional cases. For example, an effective mechanism used to achieve the highest level of coordination and support for major narcotics cases is the special Operations Division. Prosecutors in our Narcotics and Dangerous Drug Section work together in SOD with agents and analysts from the DEA, the FBI, the Customs Service to support regional, national, and international criminal investigations and prosecutions, targeting the major criminal drug trafficking organizations threatening the United States.
The division currently operates on a fiscal year appropriation of $110 million. For fiscal year 2002, the president's budget requests approximately $112 million with enhancements requested to bolster some of the division's key programs in the areas of counterterrorism, cybercrime and international law enforcement. As a result of emerging computer technology over recent years, significant attention has been and continues to be focused on the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to cybercrime and cyberterrorist attacks.
The division is requesting enhancements of nearly $3 million to strengthen its leadership role within the department in those areas. This request will support national strategies and priorities and help address the rising workload in the division's sections that handle the increasingly complex nature of crime resulting from globalization and a proliferation of technology.
Page 167 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I hope this overview is helpful to your understanding of the work of the Criminal Division, and I would be pleased to answer any questions that you have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Horowitz follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL E. HOROWITZ
Chairman Smith, Ranking Minority Member Scott, and Members of the Subcommittee, I am pleased to appear today before you to describe the responsibilities and activities of the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice.
I presently serve as the Chief of Staff in the Criminal Division. I have been a Federal prosecutor for the past ten years, having served as a line attorney and supervisor in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, and am proud to have worked in the Criminal Division since 1999.
My testimony today will outline the Criminal Division's role within the Department of Justice and Federal law enforcement. The mission of the Criminal Division is to develop, enforce, and exercise oversight involving the prosecution of Federal criminal laws, in cooperation with the United States Attorneys, and State and local law enforcement officials. The Division oversees the enforcement of more than 900 Federal criminal statutes and advises the Attorney General in setting and developing Federal law enforcement priorities and policies. The Criminal Division also develops policies, procedures, tools, and training on prosecution techniques to improve the Nation's crime-fighting capabilities.
Page 168 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
In addition, the Criminal Division provides special prosecutorial expertise on a wide range of unique domestic and international issues, as well as in sensitive law enforcement areas, such as ''Title III'' electronic surveillance and attorney subpoenas. (''Title III'' refers to title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended.) Further, the Criminal Division addresses emerging crimesfor example, computer crime and cyber-terrorismby providing personnel support and resources, in a flexible manner, as appropriate.
The Criminal Division also facilitates coordination and direction on many complex multi-jurisdictional cases, frequently working with other Federal, State, and local investigative agencies and authorities. By doing so, the Criminal Division provides oversight to ensure consistency and uniformity in developing an effective approach to fighting criminal activity.
Moreover, the Criminal Division works with our foreign counterparts to develop legal assistance relations and partnerships, as well as to strengthen foreign law enforcement institutions. The crime problem in the United States no longer rests solely within our borders, and we in the Criminal Division are responsible for providing assistance to Federal, State and local prosecutors in obtaining evidence from foreign governments. The Criminal Division is led by the Assistant Attorney General and five Deputy Assistant Attorneys General. Under their leadership and guidance, the Division's Sections and Offices work in various subject-matter areas to address the law enforcement and criminal prosecution needs of each area. There are approximately 430 attorneys who work within the Criminal Division's Sections and Offices. The Division currently operates on a Fiscal Year 2001 Appropriation of $110 million. For Fiscal Year 2002, the President's Budget requests approximately $120 million, with enhancements requested to bolster some of the Division's key programs. The Division's FY 2002 request focuses on counterterrorism and cybercrime. As a result of emerging computer technology over recent years, significant attention has been, and continues to be, focused on the vulnerability of the critical infrastructure to cybercrime and cyberterrorist attacks. The Division is requesting enhancements of nearly $3 million to strengthen its leadership role within the Department in these areas. Because the Division recognizes the complementary but interdependent roles played in meeting the emerging challenges of criminal law enforcement, the request includes not only attorney positions, but also analytical support and infrastructure protection improvements. In addition, the Division continues to work to implement effective strategic planning efforts, with the specific goal of developing processes that will better inform the resource and program decisions made by the Executive level managers.
Page 169 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
In this era of globalization and lightning-fast communications across borders, the Criminal Division has endeavored to address such transnational threats. Many sophisticated criminal organization whether drug traffickers, money launderers, computer hackers, terrorists, spies, or the likedo not limit their activities to one jurisdiction within borders: they operate throughout the world. Therefore, you will note throughout my remarks today that most of the responsibilities of the Criminal Division components span both domestic and international law enforcement.
I would like to take this opportunity to discuss some of the Criminal Division's recent work and accomplishments in the area of counter-terrorism, cybercrime, international coordination and assistance, traditional law enforcement concerns, and providing support for Federal prosecutors nationwide. First, let me address the growing problems of terrorism and cybercrime, where the Division is seeking enhancements in FY 2002.
The Division's Terrorism and Violent Crime Section (TVCS) designs, implements, and supports law enforcement efforts, legislative initiatives, policies and strategies relating to domestic and international counter-terrorism, in coordination with other Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies, and foreign counterparts. This includes direct participation in the investigation and prosecution of virtually all international terrorism cases and particularly critical domestic terrorism cases. These efforts are reflected in the Five-Year Interagency Counter-terrorism and Technology Crime Plan, which serves as the national strategy for counterterrorism.
Page 170 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Coordination of multi-district international counter- terrorism investigations by the Division supplies specific expertise and promotes consistency in the enforcement of a nationwide program to attack international terrorism. This involves: coordination with foreign intelligence agencies to obtain necessary information to support search and arrest warrants; review of the legal sufficiency of charges and pleadings; and coordination among offices to facilitate the timing of prosecutive steps optimal to multiple coordinated prosecutions. Many U.S. Attorneys' Offices rely on the expertise developed by the Division. For example, Division attorneys provided significant support to the U.S. Attorney's Office in Seattle in a major prosecution of terrorism transcending national borders which resulted in the recent conviction of Ahmed Ressam.
Pursuant to the Department of Justice's Crisis Response Plan, TVCS serves as a central coordinator for the receipt and dissemination of information pertinent to ongoing critical law enforcement incidents. This program includes the Attorney Critical Incidence Response Group, a core of Department attorneys, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, and the Crisis Management Coordinators, designated senior Assistant U.S. Attorneys in each U.S. Attorney's Office specially trained in crisis management. Under this program, instruction and materials are provided by TVCS so that, in the event of a terrorist or other critical incident, each U.S. Attorney's Office has a baseline of ''in- house'' expertise with additional support, as needed.
Designation of Foreign Terrorist Organizations
The Criminal Division also participates in and contributes to, on behalf of the Department, the inter-agency process of the Secretary of State's designation of Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs), pursuant to the Anti-terrorism Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. The Division has played a key role in the preparation of administrative records to support these designations, so as to withstand legal challenge. In October 1997, the Secretary of State designated a list of 30 FTOs, pursuant to the anti-terrorist financing provisions. The list was revised in October 1999. There are currently 29 FTOs.
Page 171 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The Criminal Division is similarly responding to the increasing threat posed by cyber-terrorism. Communication networksespecially the Internetlink governments, businesses, and individuals in the same interconnected digital system. These networks offer great benefits, but also provide a way to reach within our borders to commit terrorist acts. For instance, an individual with a computer and an Internet connection anywhere in the world could potentially break into critical systems, shut down an airport's air traffic control system, disrupt emergency services for an entire community, or launch a destructive ''denial-of-service'' attack.
In this developing environment, law enforcement must be prepared and equipped to investigate cyber-crime quickly and effectively. When a cyber-attack first occurs, it is not immediately clear whether the attack is state-sponsored cyber- warfare, cyber-terrorism by a transnational organization, or non- terrorist criminal activity, either domestic or foreign. Accordingly, America's national security will increasingly depend on strong and capable law enforcement organizations.
The Division's Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS) led the Department's efforts to combat cyber- terrorism and to ensure critical infra-structure protection through its work on a Five-Year Counterterrorism Strategy, support to the National Infrastructure Protection Center, and extensive international work. CCIPS participated in the National Plan for Information Systems Protection process, resulting in the publication of the National Plan in January 2000 by the interagency group and the Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office.
Page 172 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Just as computer networks cross borders, computer crime is inherently multi-jurisdictional and international, with victims scattered around the Nation and the world. Thus, CCIPS plays an important role in coordinating and, oftentimes, leading multi- jurisdictional and international computer crime investigations and prosecutions.
The Criminal Division has made considerable progress in the fight against cybercrime. With respect to particular investigations and prosecutions, CCIPS coordinated the investigation and advised in the prosecution of, or took the lead in prosecuting, a large number of significant cybercrime cases, including the following:
1. The ''denial of service attacks'' that exposed the vulnerabilities of our infrastructure and gained national and international notoriety in February 2000, resulting in the successful prosecution of a Canadian juvenile;
2. The ''Melissa Virus'' (which resulted in a guilty plea and the defendant's admission to causing more than $80,000,000 in damage at sentencing in December 1999); and
3. A juvenile who unlawfully hacked into a United States military computer network used by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, leading to one of the first cases in which a juvenile was sentenced to detention in Federal court for computer hacking.
CCIPS also assisted in a tremendous number of investigations that required agents and prosecutors to obtain electronic evidence.
Page 173 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
In the international arena, the Criminal Division works bilaterally with its foreign counterparts, including the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada, among others. Moreover, CCIPS continues to chair the Group of Eight Subgroup on High-Tech crime and to work internationally in other fora to build international capabilities to fight cybercrime.
Training on Computer Crimes
The Criminal Division provides extensive training and manuals to Federal prosecutors and investigators regarding computer criminal enforcement. CCIPS created and trained a network of prosecutors, comprised of Assistant U.S. Attorneys from each U.S. Attorney's Office, called Computer- Telecommunications Coordinators (CTCs), to expand and improve expertise among Federal prosecutors. CCIPS also provided training to thousands of Federal agents, administrators, prosecutors, and private agents/administrators; conducted highly successful advanced and basic computer crime courses; and led the National Cybercrime Training Partnership in moving forward to teach existing courses and develop additional courses, particularly to State and local investigators and prosecutors. In addition, CCIPS has recently completed a manual, Searching and Seizing Computers and Obtaining Electronic Evidence in Criminal Investigations (published in December 2000). CCIPS also works closely with the private sector, encouraging victims to report cybercrime and industry to develop mechanisms to prevent and to address cybercrime.
Increasingly, the type of cybercrime most likely to cause significant harm to consumers and businesses here and abroad, and to undermine consumer confidence in the Internet, is Internet fraud. Since 1999, the Division's Fraud Section has overseen a comprehensive Internet Fraud Initiative that the Department established to provide a coordinated approach to combating Internet Fraud. This initiative has six principal objectives:
Page 174 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Development of information of the actual nature and scope of Internet fraud;
Training of prosecutors and investigators;
Development of investigative and analytical resources;
Providing regional, national and international coordination;
Providing litigation support and advice; and
Conducting public education and prevention programs.
The Division's accomplishments to date in implementing the Initiative are impressive.
1. The Division has supported the establishment of the Internet Fraud Complaint Center, a joint project of the FBI and the National White Collar Crime Center. The Fraud Section has also worked with the Federal Trade Commission on providing more information about consumer frauds on the Internet to law enforcement agencies.
Page 175 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
2. The Division has trained more than 260 Federal, State, and foreign prosecutors and Federal agents on Internet fraud since 1999 and has added an Internet fraud component to the basic Cybercrimes seminar at the National Advocacy Center.
3. The Division chairs the inter-agency Telemarketing and Internet Fraud Working Group, which brings together Federal law enforcement and regulatory agencies for closer cooperation. The Section, through the Group of Eight High-Tech Crime Subgroup, developed a proposal for coordinated action against Internet fraud, which was adopted by the G8 Crime Ministers in October 1999, and is continuing discussions in the G8 High-Tech Crime and Projects Subgroups.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CRIMES
As computers and networks become more complex, it is increasingly hard to secure them from hackers through technical means. At the same time, our country's wealth is increasingly held not in hard assets but in intellectual property, which can be freely copied and disseminated in digital form over computer networks. In this developing information society, law enforcement plays a critical role.
With respect to its intellectual property mission, CCIPS continues to advance the Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Initiative. That initiative includes:
1. Enhancing enforcement efforts in seven key jurisdictions;
2. Expanding investigator and prosecutor training;
Page 176 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
3. Proposing legal and procedural reform; and
4. Streamlining industry referral procedures.
Under this initiative, CCIPS has coordinated charges and prosecutions for schemes to purchase and resell for profit counterfeit satellite television access cards in over a dozen cases, supported the investigation and prosecution of cases involving counterfeit computer chips (one case resulted in a $2 million fine and over $1 million in restitution), and devoted considerable resources to developing the manual, Prosecuting Intellectual Property Crime, which was published in December 2000.
Now, I would like to turn our attention to the increasing number of international cases and issues facing Federal criminal law enforcement today.
INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AND COORDINATION
As crime becomes more globalized, the Criminal Division is increasingly being called upon to work with foreign governments, to coordinate activities and issues with national, State and local officials, and to provide an overall perspective on international and national crime problems. International agreements, treaties, conventions, and policy initiatives form the framework for developing prosecutions and investigations that rely on evidence and witnesses that are overseas.
International Law Enforcement Cooperation
Page 177 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The United States' expanding network of Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs) and MLAT cases have led directly to the recovery of hundreds of millions of dollars in drug proceeds, fraud proceeds, and other dollars, most of it either going to the Asset Forfeiture Fund or directly to victims. For example, last year we helped recover approximately $180 million in drug proceeds located in Switzerland, and several years ago we arranged for the repatriation of approximately $54 million in drug money from Luxembourg.
Once in place, these mutual legal assistance treaties, agreements, conventions and policy initiatives form the basis for exchanging evidence and witnesses that lead to successful prosecutions. Similarly, the expanding network of extradition treaties form the basis for retrieving or returning criminal defendants to the country where they can be most effectively prosecuted. When Federal, State, or local prosecutors need fugitives or evidence from abroad, the Office of International Affairs (OIA) has the sole responsibility for processing those requests. Similarly, when foreign prosecutors request assistance from this country, OIA coordinates the execution of such requests throughout the United States. This is a critical, central role in the smooth and effective handling of criminal cases requiring international cooperation.
Many of these cases involve matters of national and international importance, and have received widespread attention in the media, including:
The U.S. extradition request to France on behalf of New York State and Federal authorities for James Kopp (accused of the 1998 murder of a reproductive health care provider). (This matter is pending resolution.)
Page 178 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The U.S. requests to the United Kingdom and Germany on behalf of the Southern District of New York for the extradition of defendants charged in the bombing of the U.S. Embassies in Africa.
Successful mutual legal assistance requests to Canada, France, and Germany that produced evidence critical to the conviction of Ahmed Ressam for conspiracy to commit terrorist acts in the United States.
The Division's Office of International Affairs performs the critical role of negotiating the international treaties and agreements that make it possible for us to handle these cases effectively. In Fiscal Year 2000, 16 new bilateral treaties (eight extradition treaties and eight mutual legal assistance treaties) entered into force. In addition, 13 new bilateral treaties (four extradition treaties and nine mutual legal assistance treaties) received Senate ratification on October 18, 2000.
OIA's treaty program ensures that Federal, State, and local prosecutors will have the tools they need to obtain the return of major fugitives and the acquisition of important evidence. OIA will continue to make diligent efforts to ensure the smooth and effective implementation of all new treaties. Simultaneously, OIA will be negotiating several additional new treaties with ''priority'' countries, as determined by the Department (with extensive U.S. law enforcement input) and the U.S. State Department.
Of particular significance in recent years has been the pursuit of new extradition treaties that authorize the surrender of the requested country's nationals, often sheltered from extradition in civil law countries. Significant strides in this area have been made through the Division and OIA's efforts in Latin America (Bolivia, Paraguay, and Argentina) and Eastern Europe.
Page 179 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The Criminal Division is also integrally involved in a variety of important multilateral treaties, conventions, and policy initiatives dealing with transnational crime and international law enforcement cooperation. By way of example, recently the Division has devoted significant resources and expertise to the negotiation of the U.N. Transnational Organized Crime convention (signed in Palermo, Italy in December 2000), the Council of Europe cybercrime and corruption conventions, and a host of other anti-crime initiatives under the auspices of the Group of Seven (and now the ''G-8''). The number and variety of such multilateral initiatives continue to grow.
Another function that the Division performs is the advancement of international criminal initiatives in multinational fora, such as the G-8, which requires a national perspective and resource-intensive negotiations best provided by a headquarters component.
FOREIGN INSTITUTION BUILDING
The Division provides many forms of assistance designed to develop and strengthen foreign law enforcement institutions so that they may be more effective partners in the fight against the transnational crime threatening American interests at home and around the world. Such assistance also promotes the establishment of the rule of law and the protection of fundamental human rights. Many of the Division's sections, such as the Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section, the Narcotic and Dangerous Drug Section, the Office of Special Investigations, and the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, provide subject-specific training to foreign prosecutors and law enforcement personnel.
Page 180 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
In addition, two sections in the Division, the Overseas Prosecutorial Development Assistance and Training (OPDAT) and International Criminal Investigation Training Assistance Programs (ICITAP), provide assistance to foreign law enforcement institutions.
OPDAT was established to help harness the Department's resources to develop foreign justice sector institutions and to enhance the administration of justice abroad. OPDAT also assists foreign prosecutors and judicial personnel by providing technical assistance and skills development support. OPDAT supports the Department's interests by promoting the rule of law and regard for human rights, by preparing foreign counterparts to cooperate more fully with the United States in combating transnational crime, and by improving foreign judicial assistance to the United States.
Working closely with entities of the U.S. Agency for International Development and the State Department, OPDAT uses a best practices methodology to develop effective criminal codes and procedures, improve institutional structures and relationships, and enhance the professional capabilities of prosecutors, judges, defense attorneys, and select law enforcement officers to help create more responsive and responsible criminal justice systems abroad. Currently, OPDAT provides justice sector development assistance in Africa, Asia, Central and Eastern Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, the Newly Independent States, including the Russian Federation, and the Middle East.
Another Division program that provides development assistance and training is the International Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program (ICITAP). ICITAP's mission is to help achieve U.S. criminal justice and foreign policy goals by assisting foreign governments in developing the capacity to provide professional law enforcement services based on democratic principles, respect for human rights and the rule of law. ICITAP was created by the Department of Justice in 1986 to respond to the need to train criminal investigators in Latin America.
Page 181 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
In the past five years, ICITAP has become a global, law enforcement development program, with projects in Africa, Asia, Central Europe, and the Middle East. Its activities have expanded to encompass two principal types of assistance projects: (1) the development of indigenous police forces during international peace operations; and (2) the enhancement of capabilities of existing police forces in emerging democracies. This assistance takes the form of police academy development, recruit training, in-service training for veteran officers, forensics training, education for senior managers, and help with strategic planning. To date, ICITAP has worked in over 70 countries, at a level ranging from $25-35 million per year, for the past four years.
Strong efforts are being made by the Criminal Division, OPDAT, ICITAP, and the Department of State to identify substantive areas and countries where OPDAT and ICITAP can work together more closely to provide even more effective and sustainable assistance to foreign law enforcement institutions.
Let me next turn to areas of traditional law enforcement concern. As Attorney General Ashcroft has indicated, these areas, which include the problems of organized crime, gun violence and drug trafficking, will continue to be an important focus of the Department's work.
To achieve success in prosecuting domestic organized crime and labor racketeering groups, the Division's Organized Crime and Racketeering Section (OCRS) has been involved in setting national priorities for the organized crime program by coordinating with investigative agencies. The investigation and prosecution of these cases by the Strike Force Units within U.S. Attorneys' Offices in 21 Federal districts are supervised by OCRS.
Page 182 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
In response to the alarming growth of transnational organized crime groups and the rapid increase in investigations and prosecutions involving overseas actors, the principal enforcement efforts are directed against groups such as Italian Organized Crime groups (including La Cosa Nostra and the Sicilian Mafia), Asian Organized Crime Groups (such as Chinese Triads and ethnic Asian gangs), and Russian Organized Crime. OCRS monitors the vast flow of information from classified and open sources on international organized crime figures, conducts liaison with the intelligence community, and performs specialized tasks, such as litigation under the Classified Information Procedures Act, that arise in the field's prosecution of international cases.
The Division's narcotics enforcement mission is to reduce the supply of illegal drugs in the United States by investigating and prosecuting priority national and international drug trafficking groups. The Division is also tasked with providing sound legal, strategic and policy guidance in support of that end. To achieve this mission, the Division works closely with Federal law enforcement agencies, their international counterparts, and U.S. Attorneys' Offices to provide guidance, direction, and resources at the national level for drug investigations and prosecutions.
Special Operations Division
An effective mechanism used to achieve the highest level of coordination and support for major narcotics cases is the Special Operations Division (SOD). Agents, analysts, and prosecutors from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the U.S. Customs Service (USCS), and the Criminal Division, work together in SOD to support regional and national-level criminal investigations and prosecutions targeting the major criminal drug trafficking organizations threatening the United States.
Page 183 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The Criminal Division's Narcotic and Dangerous Drug Section (NDDS) directs and coordinates SOD investigations with Assistant U.S. Attorneys across the country to ensure that each district involved in a nationwide investigation is informed as to the actions taking place in the other districts and the interrelationship of each district in the overall criminal conspiracy. The Division's Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section also works within SOD to coordinate complex international and domestic money laundering investigations and prosecutions.
The SOD strategy ensures that each district agrees to a coordinated plan of attack, so that large, nationwide trafficking groups are taken down in a single, well-timed enforcement action. The Division also deploys attorneys to assist in national priority SOD investigations, as needed. These cooperative efforts have resulted in a number of successful drug trafficking investigations:
Operation ''Mountain Express,'' targeting brokers of methamphetamine precursor chemicals, which resulted in 150 arrests in ten judicial districts nationwide, seizures of 10 metric tons of pseudoephedrine capable of producing 18,000 pounds of methamphetamine, 83 pounds of finished methamphetamine, two pseudoephedrine extraction laboratories, one methamphetamine laboratory, 136 pounds of processing chemicals, and $8 million in cash.
Operation ''Rio Blanco,'' a multi-district SOD operation, resulted in the arrest of 55 individuals and the seizure of more than 3,000 kilograms of cocaine and over $15 million in U.S. currency. The principal targets included high-ranking associates of the Arellano Felix organization in Mexico responsible for smuggling substantial quantities of cocaine into the United States.
Page 184 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Operation ''Tar Pit'', targeting Mexican heroin traffickers (over 200 arrests in eight judicial districts and in Mexico).
Bilateral Case Initiative
In addition, the Division coordinates the domestic prosecution of international drug trafficking organizationsoften referred to as the Bilateral Case Initiative (BCI). The BCI aims to investigate and prosecute large transnational narcotics traffickers in U.S. courts, using evidence gathered by the law enforcement activities of foreign governments. It involves DEA's Office of Foreign Operations, SOD, and the interagency Linear Approach Committee. The Division's NDDS is currently involved in 19 separate ongoing investigations against high level trafficking and money laundering organizations operating in the Caribbean, South and Central America. Operation ''Millennium'' is probably the best known success of the BCI; it resulted in the indictment in the Southern District of Florida of 30 high-level Colombian traffickers, including Fabio Ocho-Vasquez and Alejandro Bernal-Madrigal. Based upon recent changes in Colombian law, this operation has also led to efforts by NDDS, in coordination with the Division's Office of International Affairs, to pursue extradition of many of the Colombian individuals indicted in this country.
The Criminal Division, on behalf of the Department of Justice, has assumed lead responsibility for the planning and implementation of a comprehensive program of justice sector reform assistance to the Government of Colombia. Funding earmarked in last year's emergency supplemental appropriation for the U.S./Colombia Initiative Justice Sector Reform Program to be implemented by the Departments of Justice and the Treasury totals $88 million and includes: the establishment and expansion of specialized vetted Colombian law enforcement task forces; criminal code reform; prosecutor training; programs to enhance Colombia's anti-money laundering and forfeiture efforts; an anti-kidnaping initiative; a judicial police training program; witness and judicial security programs; customs police training; maritime enforcement and port security; the multilateral case initiative; and prison security. Specific projects and program designs within the Justice Sector Reform Program have been carefully coordinated within the U.S. Government and with Colombian counterpart agencies to ensure that appropriate assistance will be provided to meet Colombia's most pressing needs.
Page 185 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The Criminal Division, in close consultation with the Department of the Treasury, has coordinated an extensive interagency planning effort in each of the program areas and implementation of specific projects in each of the program areas has already commenced. Components participating in the planning and implementation of the U.S./Colombia Initiative Justice Sector Reform Program include: the Criminal Division; DEA; FBI; U.S. Marshals Service (USMS); U.S. Bureau of Prisons (BOP); Department of the Treasury (Enforcement); U.S. Customs Service (USCS); U.S. Secret Service; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF); Internal Revenue Service (IRS); and Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). Personnel from the participating components and prosecutors from various U.S. Attorneys' Offices will participate in the implementation of these important programs.
To manage and coordinate the implementation of the Justice Sector Reform Program in Colombia, the Division has assigned to the Embassy staff in Bogota a senior Assistant U.S. Attorney on detail to the Division. The Program Manager, together with an Executive Officer and staff, will be responsible for on-site coordination of the implementation and oversight of the U.S. Colombia Initiative Justice Sector Reform Program.
Capital Crimes Unit
Many Federal capital crime cases involve underlying drug charges. The Division's Capital Crimes Unit supports and informs the Attorney General's decisions regarding whether to seek the death penalty in each capital eligible case. The Unit's efforts lead to the consistent and fair application of the death penalty in Federal cases. Attorneys in the Unit also assist other Department attorneys, including Assistant United States Attorneys around the country, with aspects of capital trials that are unique to death penalty cases. They also assist in appeals and post-conviction review.
Page 186 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
MONEY LAUNDERING AND ASSET FORFEITURE
The Division's Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section (AFMLS) works closely with its law enforcement and regulatory partners to effect a coordinated approach to combating money laundering. The Division, in close coordination with the Department of the Treasury, has developed and begun implementing the National Money Laundering Strategy, pursuant to the Money Laundering and Financial Crimes Strategy Act of 1998. The first strategy was issued in September 1999 by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General, and was updated in March 2000. The 2000 Strategy set four overarching goals regarding domestic anti-money laundering enforcement efforts, regulatory and cooperative public-private preventive measures, partnerships with State and local governments, and international cooperation. These goals are supported by specific objectives and implemented through 65 specific action items. The Department is currently working with the Treasury Department to finalize the third National Money Laundering Strategy.
The Division also provides centralized policy and program oversight for the Asset Forfeiture Program. This Program is responsible for maximizing the law enforcement potential of laws designed to dismantle and destroy criminal enterprises and seize and forfeit the profits, proceeds and instrumentalities of crime. Such responsibilities include: deciding petitions for remission and mitigation of forfeitures in civil and criminal judicial cases; reviewing departmental equitable sharing cases that involve $1 million or more; and reviewing departmental proposals to forfeit attorneys' fees and forfeit businesses.
Further, AFMLS provides training to Federal, State, and local law enforcement investigators and prosecutors in an effort to maximize the appropriate use of the asset forfeiture laws. Together with the Treasury Department and other Federal law enforcement agencies, the Division's AFMLS recently led an extensive outreach and education program to inform and instruct prosecutors and investigators of the most expansive changes in U.S. forfeiture law since 1984 and important Federal rule changes. This training and outreach effort has enabled U.S. Attorneys' Offices and law enforcement investigators to implement these new provisions and procedures effectively.
Page 187 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
In furtherance of its international mission, the Division plays a significant role in several multilateral organizations that are dedicated to strengthening anti-money laundering enforcement around the globe. The most important of these organizations is the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). The FATF is comprised of 29 countries and 2 international organizations and is the principal international anti-money laundering organization in the world created by the Group of Seven Heads of State and Finance Ministers in 1989.
A recent FATF initiative, in which representatives from the Division and Departments of State and the Treasury participated, sought to publicly identify and cite ''non-cooperative countries and territories'' for failing adequately to combat money laundering. This effort culminated in a June 22, 2000, announcement citing 15 jurisdictions as ''non-cooperative'' in the fight against money laundering.
ANTI-CORRUPTION ENFORCEMENT AND OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT
The Division's Public Integrity Section oversees the Federal effort to combat abuses of the public trust by government officials. The Section investigates and prosecutes corruption offenses involving public officials at all levels of government. The Section has primary jurisdiction over allegations of criminal misconduct involving the Federal judiciary, oversees the investigation and prosecution of election crimes, and spearheads the Federal effort to address conflict of interest crimes.
The Public Integrity Section concentrates its litigation efforts on matters involving the abuse of the public trust by government officials, particularly officials in intelligence agencies and Federal law enforcement officers. Examples of recent prosecutions include the following:
Page 188 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
A former U.S. Customs Inspector has been convicted of conspiring to obstruct the Congress by creating fraudulent documents falsely indicating that a high- level Customs official was involved in drug trafficking. This was part of an effort by the defendant to cause the initiation of Senate hearings focusing on the Customs Service.
A foreign service officer previously assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Guyana has pleaded guilty to issuing visas in exchange for bribes. When the defendant was arrested, over $1,000,000 and ten gold bars (valued at $300,000) were seized from him.
In addition, efforts to address the problem of corruption on an international basis has become a significant priority of the U.S. Government. The Public Integrity Section plays a lead role in the expanded anti-corruption efforts against foreign governments and international organizations. The focus of the Division's international activities has been with the ongoing anti-corruption efforts by the Council of Europe (the Group of States Against Corruption evaluation mechanism) and the United Nations. The Public Integrity Section, along with the Office of International Affairs, also works with other countries in the hemisphere to ensure effective implementation of the Organization of American States Anti-Corruption Convention.
The Division uses its expertise to develop and implement effective enforcement initiatives designed to enhance the effectiveness of the Federal law enforcement response to these crimes. Under the National Anti-Violent Crime Initiative (AVCI), the Division's Terrorism and Violent Crime Section (TVCS) has ongoing responsibilities in coordinating pertinent enforcement strategies with U.S. Attorneys' offices. Recognizing that no single solution should be imposed by headquarters, each U.S. Attorney's Office was asked to assess the violent crime problem in its district and tailor its program to address its specific violent crime concerns, with support and guidance provided by the Division. The effectiveness of this strategy has contributed significantly to the decrease in violent crime nationwide, and the AVCI has been a model for other national enforcement programs. The Division has also prepared comprehensive resource materials for use by U.S. Attorneys' Offices nationwide to assist them in implementing their gun prosecution programs.
Page 189 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
FRAUD AND WHITE-COLLAR CRIMES
Identity theft is the misappropriation of an individual's personal identification information, and it has emerged as an extremely significant law enforcement concern. The Division, through the Fraud Section, has been responsible for the development of policy and coordination with the FBI, the Department of the Treasury, the U.S. Secret Service, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Social Security Administration. The FTC recently established a referral system, pursuant to 1998 legislation, that will substantially facilitate and expedite criminal prosecutions of identity theft.
Health Care Fraud
The Criminal Division, through its Fraud Section, is also responsible for the coordination and investigation of several nationwide healthcare fraud investigations and prosecutions. For example, in January 2001, Columbia/HCA, the largest hospital chain in the U.S., entered into the largest government fraud settlement in history. Pursuant to a global criminal plea and civil settlement agreement negotiated by the Fraud Section, Columbia/HCA paid more than $95 million in criminal fines and $745 million in civil damages and penalties for defrauding government health care programs. At one point, there were criminal and civil matters open in over 30 districts. The Division's Fraud Section coordinated these investigations, including the coordination of nationwide search warrants, and had direct responsibility for handling some of the investigations. This effort required the resolution of a number of complex issues involving the United States Attorneys' Offices, the Department's Civil Division, the FBI, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Securities and Exchange Commission, as well as the National Association of Medicaid Fraud Units.
Page 190 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
INTERNAL SECURITY AND ESPIONAGE CRIMES
Bringing to justice individuals who spy on our country is a high priority for the Division. The Criminal Division's Internal Security Section is responsible for conducting, handling, and supervising the investigations and prosecution of all espionage cases, which constitute some of the most sensitive cases handled by the Department. The Internal Security Section is the Department's chief resource when it comes to addressing issues that arise in investigations and prosecutions under the various national security statutes and those that cut across intelligence and law enforcement lines. At the present time, the Division is actively engaged in a number of ongoing investigations and prosecutions, and is monitoring and assisting in countless others.
The Internal Security Section also oversees cases involving efforts on the part of foreign governments and other organizations to acquire U.S. military and strategic technology illicitly, and cases in which classified information has been disclosed publicly without authorization. One current initiative is to develop law enforcement strategies for investigations and prosecutions relating to offenses committed by countries known to sponsor terrorism and illegally to procure weapons and strategic technology from the United States.
As an increasing number of Federal criminal cases involve international issues, more and more cases involve intelligence agency participation and/or equities. The Internal Security Section serves as the Department's interface with the intelligence community on criminal cases involving intelligence community concerns. Department policy requires that all communications by the U.S. Attorneys' Offices with the intelligence community on criminal cases be coordinated with the Division. Each year the Division participates in well over 50 cases involving the potential discovery and/or disclosure of classified information.
Page 191 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Recently, the Criminal Division established an Alien Smuggling Task Force to ensure that the Department takes a comprehensive and coordinated approach to the growing problem of alien smuggling. The Task Force is involved in policy, operational, and training matters. The Task Force works closely with various government agencies, both within and outside the Department, including the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), the FBI, the Departments of State and Transportation (U.S. Coast Guard), the National Security Council, and the Intelligence Community.
The Task Force also assists other components of the United States Government in addressing unusual or complex issues pertaining to smuggling from particular countries, including China and Cuba. Currently, the Task Force is part of a group that focuses on China-based smuggling organizations, particularly those involved in the use of shipping containers. The Task Force also participates in the semi-annual U.S.-Cuba Migration Talks. On an international level, the Task Force works closely with U.S. law enforcement agents stationed abroad and with foreign counterparts on a variety of issues, including training, promoting the new U.N. protocol on migrant smuggling, enacting and enforcing alien smuggling laws, and investigating large and dangerous international alien smuggling organizations.
Domestically, and in support of its international efforts, the Task Force works with prosecutors throughout the United States, giving legal advice, coordinating multi-district investigations, and providing litigation support in particular cases, primarily those having sensitive intelligence or international aspects. For example, the Task Force assisted in a Federal prosecution in Houston involving an organization that smuggled women from Thailand to work as prostitutes. The Task Force also is creating an electronic brief bank to assist Federal prosecutors.
Page 192 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
TRAFFICKING IN WOMEN AND CHILD EXPLOITATION
The Division's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS) has developed an expertise in the areas of trafficking of women for prostitution and use of the Internet by child pornography and pedophile rings and uses this expertise to represent the Justice Department internationally. CEOS attorneys have a broad perspective on sex exploitation issues that enables them to work with Interpol, the European Union, and others on sharing best practices to combat trafficking in persons and child pornography. CEOS also implements the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 by providing training to foreign law enforcement, as called for by the Act.
CEOS is also uniquely positioned to advise the State Department on international issues involving sex exploitation. For example, CEOS has been instrumental in advising the Department of State on what would be consistent with U.S. law during the negotiations on the Optional Protocol on the Rights of the Child, the Convention on the Worst Forms of Child Labor, and the Protocol to Combat the Trafficking of Persons. CEOS has researched Federal law and the law of all 50 States to ensure that the United States can sign and ratify these multilateral instruments.
In addition, investigating and prosecuting crimes against children is one of the highest priorities of the Department and the Division. Both the FBI and the U.S. Customs Service have set as a priority the development of national and international-scale child pornography cases. Because such cases involve multiple districts, CEOS manages and coordinates such multi-jurisdictional cases.
Page 193 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
WAR CRIMES AND SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS
The Division's Office of Special Investigations (OSI) investigates and takes appropriate action against persons who, in conjunction with the Axis regimes, participated in the persecution of any person because of race, religion, national origin or political opinion between 1933 and 1945. Although the Office's workload was expected to decrease with the aging of its targeted criminal population, a number of factors have combined to expand workload over what was previously anticipated. These factors include:
1. The fall of Communism in Europe has generated scores of new investigations and numerous new prosecutions by permitting direct investigative access for the first time to archives that collectively house the largest group of captured Nazi war documents extant. OSI is continuing to exploit access to archives in cities and villages throughout Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union that have opened since the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
2. OSI has developed the expertise to investigate persons who participated in Japanese persecution during World War II.
3. OSI has assumed responsibility in major Administration and congressional initiatives, such as the massive inter-agency investigation into assets looted from victims of Nazi persecution, in which OSI took principal investigative responsibility (and lead departmental responsibility).
4. The Executive Branch has complied with the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act and the Japanese War Crimes Disclosure Act, as to which OSI has provided major logistical, historical and financial support, as well as departmental representation.
Page 194 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The Division anticipates that each of these factors will continue to expand the Office's workload.
Finally, I would like to address three Offices within the Criminal Division that support the prosecutorial and law enforcement functions of the Division and U.S. Attorneys' Offices.
The Division's Office of Enforcement Operations (OEO) provides investigative and prosecutorial support, legal advice, and statutorily-required review and approval in almost 40 distinct subject areas. Among the investigative and prosecutorial support services that OEO provides to the U.S. Attorneys' Offices, Federal investigative agencies, and the various Criminal Division components are:
1. Reviewing all Federal requests to intercept wire, oral, and most types of electronic communications (discussed more fully below);
2. Authorizing or denying the entry of applicants into the Witness Security Program;
3. Reviewing and authorizing requests to apply for court orders permitting the use of video surveillance;
4. Reviewing and deciding applications for transfer made through the International Prisoner Transfer Program and serving as liaison between all governments involved in the program; and
Page 195 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
5. Coordinating requests to immunize witnesses, subpoena attorneys or the media, or search the offices of attorneys who are suspects or targets of an investigation.
Title III Electronic Surveillance
As mentioned above, the Criminal Division's OEO reviews each application for court-authorized interception of wire, oral, and electronic communications, and makes a recommendation to the authorizing official as to the legality and appropriateness of the request. OEO attorneys, who are experts on electronic surveillance, work closely with Federal law enforcement officials in the drafting and review of these requests, as well as on the myriad of legal issues that arise during the course of investigations utilizing electronic surveillance and on legislative and policy matters involving electronic surveillance.
Because of enforcement efforts, such as the counterdrug Special Operations Division (discussed above), the number of new wiretaps in drug investigations has grown significantly. In Fiscal Year 2000, OEO processed the largest number of wiretap applications in its history, 1,607(an increase from 1,591 in Fiscal Year 1999), and OEO projects another increase in Fiscal Year 2001to approximately 1750 wiretaps. Nearly 80 percent of the wiretap applications processed by OEO were for narcotics investigations.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE ISSUES
The Division's responsibilities to develop, enforce, and exercise general oversight for Federal criminal laws are also carried out through the support provided by the Appellate Section, which prepares draft briefs and certiorari petitions for the Solicitor General for filing in the U.S. Supreme Court. The Appellate Section makes recommendations to the Solicitor General as to whether further review is warranted of adverse decisions in the District Courts and Courts of Appeals. In addition, the Section prepares briefs and argues cases in the Courts of Appeals and in District Courts in cases of national importance. Section attorneys also assist U.S. Attorneys in preparing briefs for the Courts of Appeals and provide advice on the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, Commerce Clause issues, recent Supreme Court decisions, and a variety of other criminal legal matters.
Page 196 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
POLICY AND LEGISLATION
The Office of Policy and Legislation (OPL): analyzes policy and management issues relating to the criminal justice system; identifies problems and emerging trends; develops options, recommendations and legislative proposals; and provides research, technical, and management support to senior managers in the Division and the Department. The Office is involved in projects that require regular interaction and coordination with U.S. Attorneys' Offices, the Office of Justice Programs, and Federal investigators, as well as other law enforcement officials. It works closely with the U.S. Sentencing Commission and provides legal support to the Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules and Evidence of the Judicial Conference regarding the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence.
Mr. Chairman and Ranking Minority Member Scott, I would like to thank you and the other Members of the Subcommittee for the opportunity to describe the responsibilities and activities of the Criminal Division. At this time I would be pleased to address any inquiries you might have regarding the Criminal Division. I look forward to continuing to work with you and the Members of your Subcommittee.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Horowitz.
Page 197 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 STATEMENT OF MARY LOU LEARY, ACTING ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS
Ms. LEARY. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee.
I am very pleased to have this chance to come and discuss the programs and activities of the Office of Justice Programs.
As you know, OJP works with States and with local communities to improve their ability to reduce crime and illegal drug use, to improve the operations of the criminal and the juvenile justice systems, and to assist crime victims. We develop innovative crime reduction approaches. We provide technical expertise, funding, training, and other tools to assist communities in fighting crime.
We also conduct research to determine what works in reducing crime and improving our justice system. We disseminate the results of that knowledge to practitioners and policymakers throughout the country so that they can make well-informed decisions about how to allocate their Federal, State, and local resources.
As you know, Mr. Chairman, I have served as the Acting Assistant Attorney General at OJP for just over a year now, and during that time and during my previous many years with the Department of Justice, I have been really impressed by the many innovative initiatives developed through OJP and with the sound and fruitful partnerships that OJP has developed with State and local criminal justice practitioners.
Page 198 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
I spent 16 years as a State prosecutor in Middlesex County, Massachusetts, initially, and then in the U.S. Attorney's Office here in DC before I came over to OJP. When I was in those positions, particularly at the U.S. Attorney's Office in DC, I had a chance to see firsthand the positive impact that many of the OJP programs, particularly Weed and Seed, can have on a community.
As a front-line prosecutor, I have seen the devastation that crime can wreak in a community, especially violent crime. But I have really also seen how those crime-torn communities, with a lot of hard work and dedication at that local level and some targeted Federal resources, can take hold of it, turn their neighborhoods around, and make them safe places to live.
I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Committee for your support for this kind of important work that OJP has been doing. I particularly appreciate your interest in the past year or so in our efforts to restructure our agency so that we can better meet the needs of our State and local constituents.
I am looking forward to giving my support and assistance to OJP's new leadership in this Administration to build on the work that has already been done to improve customer service, eliminate redundancy and enhance our operations at OJP.
Our goal is to improve OJP's abilities to serve State and local justice practitioners and to contribute to the Administration's priorities, which are reducing gun use, combating illegal drug use, guaranteeing the rights of all Americans and empowering communities in their fight against crime.
Page 199 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
I am sure that you are aware that we just announced plans last week to award $75 million in grants to help communities hire prosecutors who will be dedicated to the prosecution of firearms-related violent crimes.
This community gun violence prosecution program will help jurisdictions of every size more effectively prosecute gun-related crimes. This initiative sends a signal to would-be criminals that the community is ready and that they will face serious consequences if they use a gun to commit a crime.
We are planning in 2002 to build on this effort. We have requested almost $50 million for a new program, and that program will provide grants to help States target gun criminals, increase arrests and prosecutions, and develop public awareness campaigns and partnerships to deter gun violence.
We also plan to support Project Sentry. That is a new effort that would establish safe schools task forces across the country to prosecute and supervise juveniles who carry or use guns illegally, as well as the adults who illegally furnish firearms to them. Project Sentry would also establish partnerships in the community, schools, and the like to help deter kids from gun-related violence.
We are planning to implement Project Child Safe. This new program will fulfill the President's promise to ensure that child safety locks are available for every handgun in America. We will award grants to State and local governments and establish a national toll-free hotline so that parents can use that to get more information about safe gun storage.
Page 200 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
We are also working to break the cycle of drug use and crime. We plan to build on the success of our drug courts and our prison-based drug treatment programs to expand these efforts. Law enforcement is a very effective and an essential tool in combating violent crime, but treatment for the individual abuser is also very important.
Research shows that treatment, especially for incarcerated offenders, is very successful at both reducing drug use and reducing recidivism. For this reason, we requested an additional $11 million to expand our Residential Substance Abuse Treatment program next year. RSAT, as it is known, funds substance abuse treatment for offenders incarcerated in State and local correctional facilities.
We are also looking in 2002 for funding for a new initiative that will help overburdened prosecutors on the Southwest border increase drug case prosecutions. Thousands of Federal drug arrests occurring near the Southwest border are now being referred to county prosecutors because the quantity of drugs is too small to meet the threshold set by the U.S. Attorneys there. The $50 million requested in the 2002 budget will assist counties near the Southwest border with the cost of prosecuting and detaining these referrals.
And as you know, Mr. Chairman, the Attorney General is strongly committed to ensuring the right of women to be protected against violent crime. Since the passage of the Violence Against Women Act in 1994, OJP has devoted over $1.5 billion in funding as well as training, technical assistance, and other resources to help communities improve their response to domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking.
Page 201 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 In 2002, we have requested $102.5 million in additional funding for Violence Against Women programs. This will expand existing programs and create several new programs under the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000.
There is $15 million for a Safe Havens for Children Program, $5 million for a new Elder Abuse and Neglect and Exploitation Prevention Program, and $7.5 million for education and training to end violence against and abuse of women with disabilities.
Because crime is most effectively addressed at the local level, OJP is continuing to work to empower communities at that level in their fight against crime.
I think one of our great successes in that regard is the Weed and Seed program. It is now operating in over 250 communities.
As you know, that program was developed first in the Bush Administration. And in fact, in 1992, I ran the Weed and Seed program for then U.S. Attorney Jay Stevens here in DC. In that capacity, I saw for myself what a tremendous difference those programs can make.
When I took the lead with Weed and Seed, I worked in a neighborhood over in Northeast called the Langston-Carver neighborhood. There was a hard core of residents in that community had lived there for years. They raised their kids there. They were not about to give up on that community.
And they worked with law enforcement and with other community partners. They were trust-builders for us. They went out in the community and paved the way, and we all worked together. It was the most remarkable and satisfying result I've experienced as a prosecutor.
Page 202 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
It started out small, and then we built on that. There was a law enforcement effort. We came in and cleaned up the neighborhood. And then we started looking at what the other problems were.
Neighborhood kids needed a safe place to go after school. We started a Safe Haven.
Elderly folks were unwilling and afraid to come out of their apartments. We started a program called ''Grannies in the Hood'' to provide services and activities for the elderly. And they all came out.
Economic development, neighborhood cleanup, getting the abandoned cars removed, enforcing code violationsit was a team effort for all the local and Federal agencies and the residents of that community.
They ended up feeling not just safe but proudproud of their neighborhood, proud of their neighbors, and proud of themselves.
This fiscal year OJP will award more than $49 million to sustain existing Weed and Seed programs and to expand that to additional sites. Our 2002 budget request includes a $25 million increase for Weed and Seed.
Mr. SMITH. Ms. Leary, are you nearing the end of your remarks?
Page 203 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 Ms. LEARY. I certainly am. Three paragraphs.
In addition to these budget increases, there are some reductions in the OJP budget for four of our programs that have outlived their original purpose, their authorizations, or are less essential to the core Federal law enforcement functions.
These include discretionary grants, the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, Local Law Enforcement Block Grant and State prison grants. And freeing these up will allow OJP and the Justice Department to focus on the other priorities that I mentioned with respect to guns, violence, and drugs.
My prepared statement gives you much more detail, and I am happy that you will be including that in the record. I look forward to working with you, the Members of this Committee, and new leadership at OJP. I will be happy to respond to any questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Leary follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARY LOU LEARY
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
I am pleased to have this opportunity to discuss the operations of the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) and its Fiscal Year 2002 budget. As you know, Mr. Chairman, for more than 30 years, OJP and its predecessor agencies have worked with state, local, and tribal officials and community leaders to help identify criminal and juvenile justice needs, develop innovative approaches to solving crime-related problems, leverage resources, and build capacity at the state and local levels to reduce crime and illegal drug use, improve their criminal and juvenile justice systems, and assist crime victims.
Page 204 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
OJP provides funding, technical expertise, training, information-sharing, and other resources to state, local, and tribal governments. It also sponsors research to determine what works in reducing crime and improving justice operations and uses the results of research and evaluation in program planning and resource allocation to ensure the wise investment of taxpayer dollars.
During its 33-year history, OJP's structure has evolved as various new statutes have led to the creation of new infrastructure for program administration. As we discussed with this Subcommittee at a hearing in July 1999, at the direction of Congress, OJP has undertaken a review of its current structure and developed a reorganization plan that would consolidate and streamline agency programs and activities to more efficiently and effectively serve state, local, and tribal governments. A good deal of work has been conducted, to date, to implement the principles of the reorganization plan approved by Congress.
However, as you know, Mr. Chairman, the Department's leadership is currently in a period of transition. And, as strongly as I believe the reorganization will greatly benefit OJP, I also strongly believe that the new Department and OJP leadership should be afforded the opportunity to review the reorganization plan and to make recommendations to the current Administration before implementation of the new structure.
As you are aware, Mr. Chairman, OJP comprises five program bureaus and six program offices. The OJP program bureaus are:
The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) provides funding, training, and technical assistance to state, local, and tribal governments to combat violent and drug-related crime and to help improve the criminal justice system. Its programs include the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance formula and discretionary grant programs and the Local Law Enforcement Block Grants (LLEBG) program. BJA also administers the Bulletproof Vest Grant Partnership Program, the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, the Regional Information Sharing System (RISS) Program, and the Tribal Courts Program.
Page 205 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) collects and analyzes statistical data on crime, criminal offenders, crime victims, and the operations of justice systems at all levels of government. It also provides financial and technical support to state statistical agencies and administers special programs that aid state and local governments in improving their criminal history records and information systems.
The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) supports research and development programs, conducts demonstrations of innovative approaches to improve criminal justice, develops new criminal justice technologies, and evaluates the effectiveness of OJP-supported and other justice programs. NIJ also provides major support for the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS), a clearinghouse of information on justice issues.
The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) provides grants and contracts to states to help them improve their juvenile justice systems and conducts innovative demonstration projects and research, evaluation, statistics, replication, technical assistance, and training programs to help improve the nation's understanding of and response to juvenile violence and delinquency.
The Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) administers victim compensation and assistance grant programs created by the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (VOCA). OVC also provides funding, training, and technical assistance to victim service organizations, criminal justice agencies, and other professionals to improve the nation's response to crime victims. OVC's programs are funded through the Crime Victims Fund, which is derived from fines and penalties collected from federal criminal offenders, not taxpayers. OJP's six program offices are:
Page 206 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The Violence Against Women Office (VAWO) coordinates the Department of Justice's policy and other initiatives relating to violence against women and administers grant programs to help prevent, detect, and stop violence against women, including domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking. Since the passage of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) as part of the 1994 Crime Act, OJP has devoted considerable resources to help communities improve their responses to domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking by treating these offenses as serious crimes. OJP has provided over $1.5 billion under its VAWA grant programs to promote partnerships among law enforcement, prosecution, the courts, and victim advocates to ensure victim safety and accountability for offenders; to encourage arrest policies and improve investigations; to train law enforcement, court personnel, and victim advocates; to combat family violence in rural and tribal communities; to combat violence against women on college campuses; and to provide legal services to battered women.
The Corrections Program Office (CPO) provides financial and technical assistance to state and local governments to implement corrections-related programs, including correctional facility construction and corrections-based drug treatment programs. CPO also awards grants to construct jails on tribal lands to incarcerate offenders subject to tribal jurisdiction, manages the Center for Sex Offender Management, and administers OJP's offender reentry initiatives.
The Drug Courts Program Office (DCPO) supports the development, implementation, and improvement of drug courts through grants to local or state governments, courts, and tribal governments, as well as through technical assistance and training.
The Executive Office for Weed and Seed (EOWS) helps communities build stronger, safer neighborhoods by implementing the Weed and Seed strategy, a community-based, multi- disciplinary approach to combating crime. Weed and Seed involves both law enforcement and community-building activities, including economic development and support services. United States Attorneys are essential partners in the implementation of Operation Weed and Seed in communities throughout the country.
Page 207 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The Office of the Police Corps and Law Enforcement Education (OPCLEE) provides college educational assistance to students who commit to public service in law enforcement, and scholarshipswith no service commitmentfor dependents of law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty.
The Office of State and Local Domestic Preparedness Support (OSLDPS) is responsible for enhancing the capacity and capability of state and local jurisdictions to prepare for and respond to incidents of domestic terrorism involving chemical and biological agents, radiological and explosive devices, and other weapons of mass destruction (WMD). It awards grants for equipment and provides training and technical assistance for state and local first responders.
In addition, OJP's American Indian and Alaskan Native Desk (AI/AN) improves outreach to tribal communities. AI/AN works to enhance OJP's response to tribes by coordinating funding, training, and technical assistance and providing information about available OJP resources.
OJP has a Fiscal Year 2001 budget of over $4.2 billion and a staff of 947 to administer more than 50 grant and other programs to assist state, local, and tribal governments in their law enforcement and other criminal justice responsibilities. The bulk of OJP funds is awarded to the states as block or formula grants under the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance formula grant program, the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant and Juvenile Justice formula grants programs, and the prison construction grant program. Other large grant programs provide funds to local governments and agencies, as well as states. These include the Local Law Enforcement Block Grants Program and the Violence Against Women grant programs.
Page 208 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
OJP bureaus and offices also administer limited discretionary grant funding. Discretionary funds are awarded directly by OJP bureaus and offices to state, local, and tribal agencies and private organizations for a wide range of activities relating to criminal or juvenile justice. Each year, a large portion of discretionary grant funds is earmarked by Congress for specific programs. Priorities for use of the remaining funds are developed each fiscal year and announced in the OJP Program Plan, as well as through application kits and individual program announcements.
In addition, OJP's Office for Victims of Crime administers the Crime Victims Fund, which is funded entirely by money paid in fines and penalties by federal criminal offendersnot taxpayer dollars. Fines collected in one year by U.S. Attorneys, the U.S. Courts, and the Bureau of Prisons are deposited into the fund and are used for grant awards in the following year. Grants from the fund are awarded to states to support organizations that provide direct services to crime victims and for state victim compensation programs.
OJP also sponsors training and technical assistance for state, local, and tribal justice practitioners and others to disseminate the results of proven programs and state-of-the-art practices and to build capacity at the state, local, and tribal levels to prevent and control crime and improve justice system operations. Often, jurisdictions are able to replicate a successful program solely as a result of committed local leaders receiving technical assistance or training in a proven new approach. OJP is currently working to improve its delivery of training and technical assistance by making more information available on the OJP Web site, by making greater use of technology in delivering training and technical assistance, and by continuing to coordinate OJP training and technical assistance initiatives within the agency and with other providers and consumers.
Page 209 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Research and evaluationand disseminating those findingsalso are central to OJP's mission. With the bipartisan support of Congress, money is now set-aside under most major OJP programs for evaluations to help determine what works, ways we can build on successful approaches, and to inform future federal spending.
OJP's diverse research programs have helped to develop such now accepted practices as community policing and use of DNA evidence in criminal court proceedings. OJP research also has resulted in the development of critical law enforcement equipment, such as bullet-resistant vests, provided insight into arrestee drug abuse patterns in major U.S. cities, and produced a wealth of statistical information to enhance our understanding of crime victimization, trends in law enforcement, and prisoner populations. OJP also sponsors research on juvenile justice issues, including measures to prevent school violence, and compiles statistics on juvenile crime and the juvenile justice system.
The results of OJP research and evaluation are disseminated widely so that policy makers and practitioners can use these findings to improve their criminal and juvenile justice programs and operations. Much data and other information are included on OJP's Web site. OJP reports and conference calendars also are available through our publications clearinghouse, the National Criminal Justice Reference Service.
Through its grant, research, training, technical assistance and other initiatives, OJP is making an important contribution to the Administration's priorities of reducing gun crime, combating drug use, and empowering communities in their continued fight against crime. Later this year, for example, OJP will award $75 million in grants to help communities hire prosecutors who will be dedicated to the prosecution of firearm-related violent crimes.
Page 210 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The President's Budget for Fiscal Year 2002 will build on this effort. While the total request of $3.8 billion is a reduction from last year's level, it includes a number of new initiatives for reducing violent crime and increases to existing programs. It requests $49.78 million for a new gun violence program that will provide grants to encourage states to increase the prosecution of gun criminals and assist them by providing funding to establish programs that target gun criminals through increased arrests and prosecutions and public awareness to deter gun crime. This funding will support Project Exile and Project Ceasefire type programs that vigorously enforce our gun laws and send a clear signal that our culture will not tolerate the illegal use of firearms.
Another $20 million in 2002 funds would support Project Sentry. In conjunction with $9 million requested by the Office of U.S. Attorneys to hire dedicated youth violence prosecutors, this funding would establish safe school task forces across the country that will also prosecute and supervise juveniles who carry or use guns illegally, as well as the adults who illegally furnish firearms to them.
To fulfill the President's commitment to ensure child safety locks are available for every handgun in America, $75 million is requested for Project Child Safe. OJP will provide $65 million annually to state and local governments on a dollar-for-dollar matching basis. The remaining $10 million will be spent annually on administrative costs and advertising, including a national toll-free hotline to make sure all parents are aware of the program.
OJP also is working to help states and local jurisdictions combat illegal drug use and trafficking. Thousands of federal drug arrests occurring near the Southwest border are referred to county prosecutors because the quantity of drugs seized is too small to meet the threshold set by local U.S. Attorneys for prosecution. The Department's 2002 budget request includes $50 million to assist counties near the Southwest border with the costs of prosecuting and detaining these referrals. OJP grants will be awarded based on Southwest county caseloads for processing, detaining, and prosecuting drug and alien cases referred from federal arrestees.
Page 211 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The Administration's 2002 budget also would expand OJP's Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program, which provides funds for individual and group substance abuse treatment activities for offenders in residential facilities operated by state and local correctional agencies. While law enforcement is an effective and essential tool in combating the violent crime associated with illegal drug use in communities throughout our nation, treatment for the individual abuser is also important. Research has shown that treatmentparticularly for incarcerated offendersis successful in reducing both continued drug use and recidivism. For this reason, the Administration is requesting an additional $11 million to expand residential substance abuse treatment in state prison systems.
In addition, we have requested $5 million from NIJ's base funds to expand the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program to 15 additional sites across the country, so that more communities will have sound data about the links between drugs and crime on which to base their law enforcement policies and offender treatment practices.
For 2002, the Administration has requested a $102.5 million increase in Violence Against Women Act programs to support new and existing programs. This includes programs authorized under the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000, such as $15 million for the Safe Havens for Children Pilot Grant Program; $5 million for a new Elder Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Prevention Program; and $7.5 million for education and training to end violence against and abuse of women with disabilities.
Because crime is most effectively addressed at the local level, OJP continues to work with communities to provide coordinated federal funding, training, technical assistance, and information- sharing to further empower communities in their fight against crime. This effort involves building on successful programs such as Weed and Seed, an initiative combining law enforcement and prevention that was developed during the first Bush Administration.
Page 212 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
As a former United States Attorney, I saw first-hand the tremendous positive change and community and neighborhood support these programs generate. In addition, the methodology of the Weed and Seed strategy has been independently evaluated and determined to work in reducing crime and improving the vitality of neighborhoods. The number of Weed and Seed sites has grown from 23 in 1993 to over 250 today. This fiscal year, OJP will award more than $49 million to sustain existing Weed and Seed programs and to expand the project to additional sites. President Bush's FY 2002 budget includes a $25 million increase for the Weed and Seed program, of which $15.5 million replaces funding previously allocated from the Department's Asset Forfeiture Fund.
In addition to such increases, as you know, Mr. Chairman, the Administration also has proposed reductions in four OJP programs: Byrne discretionary grants; the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program; the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program; and state prison grants. These funding reductions will allow OJP and the Department of Justice to meet the other law enforcement assistance priorities highlighted in this testimony, as well as the Federal law enforcement initiatives discussed in the testimony of other Department witnesses.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, through its grant programs, training, technical assistance, research, evaluation, and information-sharing activities, OJP is working to help states, local governments, and Indian tribes improve their response to crime. It will continue to build on these efforts and to contribute to the Administration's priorities of reducing gun crime, combating illegal drug use, guaranteeing the rights of all Americans, and empowering communities in their fight against crime. I appreciate this Subcommittee's support of OJP's mission and programming, and look forward to continuing to work with you, Mr. Chairman, to support the needs of state, local, and tribal governments in reducing crime and illegal drug use, in sustaining justice system improvements, and in ensuring the safety of our communities and our citizens.
Page 213 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
This concludes my prepared testimony. I would be pleased to respond to any questions you or the Members of the Subcommittee may have.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Leary.
STATEMENT OF RALPH J. JUSTUS, ACTING DIRECTOR, COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING SERVICES
Mr. JUSTUS. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Scott, and Members of the Subcommittee, I am pleased and honored to appear before you today as acting director of the office of Community Oriented Policing Services or COPS.
I came to the COPS office in 1999 after a career in both private and public sector management including 15 years in the Department of Justice.
Quite candidly, I do not have a background in policing. I have a Ph.D. in economics. But in my 2 years at COPS, I have gained a greater appreciation for the challenges facing the men and women law enforcement and for the commitment and dedication of these officers.
I think it is particularly appropriate that the Committee has chosen to hold this hearing during Police Week, the week set aside by President Kennedy to honor these brave men and women.
Page 214 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The COPS Office, created in 1994 as a product of a bipartisan effort to invest in the safety of our nation's neighborhoods, our office was charged with two major responsibilities: advancing community policing and funding additional law enforcement officers.
Today, I will share with you the significant results from communities across America.
First and foremost, I am proud to say that COPS will have funded a total of 115,000 officers by the end of this fiscal year. Already more than 73,000 of these officers are on the beat fighting crime and improving the quality of life in our neighborhoods. These grants have gone to more than 12,400 of our nation's 18,000 law enforcement agencies.
I am often asked why there is a gap between the officers funded and the officers on the street. As you may know, it takes law enforcement agencies an average of 18 months to recruit, hire, and train a qualified officer. This is, however, a necessary delay, ensuring that local agencies can carefully select and train officers who will serve in our neighborhoods.
While COPS has partnered with many of our larger cities, we have also made an important impact on small towns. More than 82 percent of our grants have gone to departments serving populations of 50,000 or less. The COPS Office has helped to create nearly 300 new law enforcement agencies where, but for COPS funding, these communities would not have a police department. COPS recognizes that adding even one officer to a rural department can have a significant impact on both officers and community safety.
Page 215 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 COPS is proud of our successes in advancing the practice of community policing nationwide. Just this year, the Bureau of Justice Statistics showed that the number of community policing officers increased by 400 percent between 1997 and 1999.
Recognizing that advancing community policing requires a significant investment in training, COPS has created 28 regional community policing institutes, which are located throughout the country. To date, over 147,000 officers and community members have been trained in a variety of topic areas, including police ethics and unbiased policing, school safety, technology implementation, and basic community policy strategy.
COPS' unique relationship with police has allowed us to respond to emerging law enforcement challenges. After Congress made new funding available in 1998, COPS moved swiftly to fund the hiring of school resource officers to support safe and secure learning environments for all our children.
By the end of this fiscal year, COPS will have funded almost 5,000 school resource officers. We are proud to say this represents an increase in the number of school resource officers nationwide by nearly 40 percent.
I'd like to tell you about one of these officers, Sergeant Michael Webb. Sergeant Webb is with the Springfield Township Police Department. A COPS grant made it possible for him to walk the beat at Mt. Healthy Junior High School in suburban Ohio.
Without warning last September, an 8th grade student fired two rounds into the ceiling of a classroom filled with math students. Within minutes, Sergeant Webb entered the classroom with the distressed student. The handgun was still loaded, and the boy had stated his intention to kill his teacher.
Page 216 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Because of Sergeant Webb's constant presence in the school, he had developed a relationship with the 14-year-old and had insight into his troubled background. After a discussion between Sergeant Webb and the student, the boy agreed to hand over the weapon.
Sergeant Webb and other school resources officers perform a variety of functions, including teaching crime prevention classes, mentoring troubled students, and building mutual respect between law enforcement and student.
To continue this vital effort, the president seeks $180 million in his fiscal year 2002 budget request to Congress to fund up to 1,500 additional school resource officers.
In addition to school safety, COPS has responded to the pressing technology needs of American law enforcement. More than $1 billion in COPS technology grants has enabled 4,000 agencies to purchase state-of-the-art technology.
With COPS funds, the Oakland County, Michigan, law enforcement consortium purchased a comprehensive information system that enabled officers throughout the county to process reports on mobile data computers, submit reports, access fingerprints and mug shot data, and conduct a pre-bookingall of this from the field. In other words, officers can spend more time on the streets fighting crime and less time in the station out pushing paper.
Recognizing the importance and continued demand for law enforcement technology, the president has requested $355 million in technology funds. Of this, $100 million is dedicated for a new COPS Info Tech program, a $20 million increase over the 2001 technology program. Info Tech continues to provide police with the technology that is critical to officer safety and effective community policing.
Page 217 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Recognizing excessive use of force and racial profiling undermines community trust and is a barrier to community policing, the Administration proposes $17 million in fiscal year 2002 to strengthen the bonds between police and communities.
Since 1996, COPS has actively supported initiatives to promote police integrity. We have developed model problem-solving and peacemaking programs, technical assistance initiatives, and police integrity training to be delivered to law enforcement community members throughout the nation.
The COPS Office has provided significant resources to local law enforcement to fight the proliferation of methamphetamine. Already we have dedicated $153 million to this effort. In fiscal year 2002, we'll commit an additional $48 million to help State and local authorities clean up dangerous meth labs and to train police officers in enforcement activities.
Finally, recognizing the continuing unique needs of tribal communities, the COPS also will provide $31 million in assistance to Indian country law enforcement. These funds will be designated for a comprehensive program designed specifically to develop and enhance tribal policing.
In conclusion, I am very proud of the COPS Office and the significant impact our grants have had on American law enforcement and the communities they protect and serve.
To date, over $7.5 billion has been invested to make our nation better, communities stronger, and our streets safer. This is an accomplishment we can all be proud of.
Page 218 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
On behalf of the COPS Office, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify about this important program. We look forward to working with you in the future, and I request that I may submit my full written testimony for the record. I would be pleased to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Justus follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF RALPH JUSTUS
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Scott and members of the Subcommittee:
I am very pleased to appear before you today on behalf of the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services - or COPS. I am particularly honored to appear before this subcommittee and proud to represent the COPS Office as its Acting Director.
I came to the COPS Office in 1999 after a career in both private and public sector management, including eleven years in the Justice Department. Quite candidly, I do not have a background in law enforcement, I have a Ph.D. in economics. However, in my two years at COPS I have gained a greater appreciation for the challenges facing the men and women in law enforcement and for the commitment and dedication of these officers.
The COPS Office, created in 1994, is a product of a bipartisan effort to invest in the safety of our nation's neighborhoods. It is an embodiment of the concept that truly safe communities, schools, businesses and homes result from police and communities working together. Our Office was charged with two major responsibilities: to advance community policing and to fund additional law enforcement officers. Today I will share with you the significant results that are being achieved in the communities across America.
Page 219 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
First and foremost, I am proud to say that to date, COPS has funded the addition of more than 110,000 officers and we expect to reach 115,000 by the end of this fiscal year. Already, more than 73,000 of those officers are on the beat, fighting crime and improving the quality of life in our neighborhoods. These grants have gone to more than 12,400 of our nation's 18,000 law enforcement agencies. The COPS office has helped create nearly 300 new law enforcement agencies, where but for COPS funding, these communities would not have a police department.
I am often asked why there is a gap between the officers funded and the officers on the street. It takes law enforcement agencies an average of 18 months to recruit, hire, and train a qualified officer. This is, however, a necessary delay, ensuring that local agencies can carefully select and train officers who will serve in our neighborhoods. With technology grants that redeploy officers to the street, our experience shows us this delay can take longer.
While COPS has partnered with many of our largest cities, we have also made an important impact in small towns. More than 82% of our grants have gone to departments serving populations of 50,000 or less. COPS recognizes that adding even one officer to a rural department can have a significant impact on both officers and community safety.
In addition to the substantial investment in funding the addition of law enforcement officers, the COPS Office is responsible for advancing community policing. In 1993 one study showed that just 15% of law enforcement agencies practiced community policing. Today, 86% of the nation is served by an agency that practices community policing. Just this year, the Bureau of Justice Statistics showed that the number of community policing officers increased by 400% between 1997 and 1999.
Page 220 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The COPS Office has advanced community policing not only by funding additional community policing officers but also by providing practical training and technical assistance and useful research on new strategies to reduce crime and increase public safety. To deliver this important training, COPS has created 28 Regional Community Policing Institutes (RCPIs) which are located throughout the country. To date over 147,000 officers and community members have been trained in a variety of topic areas including the prevention of racial profiling, school safety, technology implementation and basic community policing strategies. Collaborating with other federal and private agencies, the RCPIs provide an effective use of federal funds to deliver training.
COPS unique relationship with police has allowed us to respond to emerging law enforcement challenges. Regrettably, over the last several years, the safety of our nation's schools has been in doubt. After Congress made new funding available in 1998, COPS moved swiftly to fund the hiring of school resource officers and to foster police/school partnerships. By the end of this fiscal year, COPS will have funded almost 5,000 school resource officers. We are proud to say this represents an increase in the number of school resource officers nationwide by nearly 40%.
I'd like to tell you about one of these officers, Sergeant Michael Webb. Sergeant Webb is with the Springfield Township Police Department. A COPS grant made it possible for him to walk a beat in a suburban Ohio school, Mt. Healthy Junior High. Without warning last September, an 8th grade student fired two rounds into the ceiling of a room filled with math students. Within minutes, Sergeant Webb entered the classroom with the distressed student. The handgun was still loaded and the boy had stated his intention to kill his teacher. Because of Sergeant Webb's constant presence in the school he had the opportunity to develop a relationship with the 14-year-old and had insight into his troubled background. After a discussion between Sergeant Webb and the student, the boy agreed to hand over the weapon.
Page 221 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Sergeant Webb and other school resource officers perform a variety of functions, including teaching crime prevention classes, monitoring troubled students, and building mutual respect between law enforcement and students. COPS provides these officers and their school administrators with team based training they need to work in partnership to protect our children. To continue this vital effort, the President seeks $180 million in his FY02 budget request to Congress to fund up to 1,500 additional school resource officers.
In addition to school safety, COPS has responded to the pressing technology needs of American law enforcement. More than $1 billion in COPS technology grants has enabled 4,000 agencies to purchase state-of- the-art technology. With this technology, law enforcement agencies can better communicate with each other, share information, and make officers more effective and efficient.
With COPS funds the Oakland County, Michigan Law Enforcement Consortium purchased a comprehensive information system that enables officers throughout the county to process reports on mobile data computers, submit reports, access fingerprint and mugshot data, and conduct a pre-bookingall from the field. In other words, officers can spend more time on the street fighting crime and less time in the station house pushing paper.
Recognizing the importance and continued demand for law enforcement technology, the President has requested $355 million in technology funds. Of this, $100 million is dedicated for a new COPS Info Tech program, a $20 million increase over the 2001 technology program. It will differ from our earlier technology programs by eliminating the burdensome redeployment tracking component. But remains similar by continuing to provide police with the technology that is critical to officer safety and effective community policing.
Page 222 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Another major component of technology that COPS will fund in 2002 is the Crime Identification Technology Assistance Act (CITA). CITA is slated to receive a $21 million increase to provide assistance to states establishing or upgrading criminal justice information systems and identification technologies. CITA funding may also be used to provide support for state and local-level participation in nationally managed databases. Other technology programs that are also expected to be funded separately from CITA include the National Criminal History Improvement Program, DNA Backlog Elimination and the Crime Laboratory Improvement Program for a proposed $35 million each.
Recognizing excessive use of force and racial profiling undermines community trust, and is a barrier to community policing, the Administration proposes $17 million in FY02 to strengthen the bonds between police and community. Since 1996, the COPS Office has initiated a nationwide dialogue on police integrity, engaging law enforcement, community-based organizations, researchers, and practitioners in this critical discussion. From this dialogue, COPS has developed model problem solving and peacemaking programs, technical assistance initiatives, and police integrity training to be delivered to law enforcement and community members throughout the nation.
The COPS Office has provided significant resources to local law enforcement to fight the proliferation of methamphetamine. Already we have dedicated $153 million to this effort. In 2002, we will commit $48 million to help state and local authorities with meth lab enforcement and cleanup, of which $20 million will be grants exclusively for cleanup.
Finally, recognizing the continuing, unique needs of tribal communities the COPS Office will provide $31 million in assistance to Indian country law enforcement. These funds will be designated for a comprehensive program designed specifically to develop and enhance tribal law enforcement agencies through specialized training, the hiring of officers, as well as the funding of equipment, technology, and vehicles.
Page 223 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
In conclusion, I am very proud of the COPS Office and the significant impact our grants have had on American law enforcement and the communities they protect and serve. To date over $7.5 billion has been invested to make our nation better, communities stronger, and our streets safer. This is an accomplishment we all can be proud of.
On behalf of the COPS Office, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify about this important program. We look forward to working with you in the future.
I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Justus.
Before we get to our questions, I want to acknowledge the presence of several Members who have joined us since our opening statement. Mr. Barr, the gentleman from Georgia; the gentleman from New York, Mr. Weiner; the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Conyers; and the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Jackson Lee.
Mr. Horowitz, let me begin my questioning with you. My first question goes to a subject that you mentioned at the very last or the very end of your oral testimony today, and that is the subject of cybercrime and cyberterrorism.
And that is of special interest, I think, to Members of this Subcommittee. And in fact, we are having one or more hearings on the subject of cybercrime between now and the end of June, so you may well be back to join us in discussing that subject more extensively.
Page 224 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
But in any case, why is that the Department of Justice wants an increase in funds? Have you seen an increase in cybercrime and cyberterrorism? How bad is the situation?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Mr. Chairman, we have in fact seen a substantial increase in the problem of cybercrime and cyberterrorism largely, again, due to the international growth of the use of technology.
The problem has become international in nature. We find ourselves spending a considerable amount of time, for example, working with our partners in Europe and around the rest of the world in developing treaties and working arrangements so that when we have an attack such as, for example, the Love Bug attack which originated in the Philippines, that we can react to that, work with our partners around the world to as quickly as possible determine where the attack came from.
Because, as you know, when the attack first hits, you don't know whether it's an attack based within our borders, an attack coming from outside in, whether it is perhaps juveniles who are simply trying to harass or go after certain entities, or a terrorist attack of some sort. And there is a substantial amount of resources that go into that initial day and then several-week period where we in law enforcement are trying to learn that information.
Mr. SMITH. What is the current budget? And what have you asked for in the new budget?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Our current budget generally is $110 million. We're asking for $120 million. $3 million of that increase would go toward both cybercrime andboth our Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, our Terrorism and Violent Crime Section, and our International Affairs Section, because they really need to work cooperatively to address this problem.
Page 225 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. SMITH. One of the other responsibilities of the Criminal Division is reducing the international and national drug trafficking cartels and their influence. What is being done in that regard?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, at the Criminal Division level, we have a number of different programs that we're involved with, primarily our Special Operations Division, which works as I mentioned with all of law enforcementthe DEA, the FBI and the Customs Servicecoordinating with our U.S. attorneys and our Criminal Division prosecutors to look at problems globallynationally and internationally.
The problem has been, in the past, that prosecutors in perhaps my old district in the Southern District of New York, or pick any other district around the country, sees the problem as it is confined to their borders.
And one of the keys I think that we in the Criminal Division play is to make sure that picture goes broader, that it ties together, for example, the wiretaps that we might have in one office and in another office, and they would not on their own perhaps be interacting and recognizing that they each had relevant information for the other. And so we play a significant role there.
We obviously have the Plan Colombia, the U.S. Colombia initiative ongoing in the country of Colombia, in which the Criminal Division is playing an important role in the implementation of the plan and the $88 million that has beenthat has been appropriated for that plan.
Page 226 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
We also have the bilateral initiatives that we are working with Mexico, which is obviously a very important participant in our drug interdiction efforts.
Mr. SMITH. Okay. That is good and encouraging news.
Mr. Horowitz, you probably anticipated my last question, which is this: Have you updated the computer technology within the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice?
Mr. HOROWITZ. We are actually undertaking that. We are about to undertake another step in the next year of upgrading all of our computers.
It has been, frankly, as chief of staff, one of the complaints I hear most from our prosecutors in the division, which is older computer equipment.
Mr. SMITH. Are you aware of any deficiency in your computer system as you sit here today?
Mr. HOROWITZ. No, I am not. The complaints that we have received are generally from the prosecutors there trying, using equipment that is perhaps now 1, 2 or 3 years old. And this year, I'm told, we will be in line to receive a substantial portion of the department's budget to upgrade our computer facilities, and that will certainly help.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Horowitz.
Page 227 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. Justus, in regard to the COPS program, it seems to me that the funds designated by that program have not necessarily been targeted at those areas where the highest crime rates exist. Why is that?
Mr. JUSTUS. A couple reasons. One, the legislation we operate requires us to give half of the grant money to populations of over 150,000 and half of it to populations under 150,000.
While we do give substantial amounts of money to areas which are high-crime areas
Mr. SMITH. Right. But within those two designations, over 150,000 people and fewer than 150,000 people, within those designations, have the funds been targeted at the areas of the highest crime rates?
Mr. JUSTUS. No, they haven't.
Mr. SMITH. Okay. Why is that?
Mr. JUSTUS. The expectation, the anticipation, is people that are having problems are applying for these grants. And community policing, I think, affects all facets of our communities.
Mr. SMITH. If individuals representing the areas with the highest crime rates haven't applied, they may need some education as to the problems they already have that they don't acknowledge.
Page 228 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
We don't need to go into it in any more detail right now, but to me a lot of the funds in the COPS program should have been targeted at the highest crimeat the areas with the highest crime rates rather than just relying on sort of individuals to apply for the funds when many individuals might have needed those funds more. That's maybe a philosophical disagreement that I had with the program, but I thank you for your brief explanation.
The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott, is recognized for his questions.
Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to defer to the gentlelady from Texas. She has another appointment.
Mr. SMITH. Okay. The gentlewoman from Texas is recognized for her questions.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you very much. I thank the Ranking Member. I thank the Ranking Member of the full Committee, and I thank the Chairman very much.
I have an opening statement, Mr. Chairman, that I'd just like to have submitted into the record.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Jackson Lee follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE SHEILA JACKSON LEE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS
Page 229 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Thank you Chairman Smith for convening today's oversight hearing on the reauthorization of the Department of Justice.
It has been more than 20 years since the Department's last reauthorization. It is my view that the Department of Justice should be properly funded to so that it can continue to provide essential protection for all Americans. Whether it be for interdiction, research, preparedness, education, or alternatives to incarceration, the Department and its thousands of men and woman who we owe so much to deserve to have our full support so that they can do the job.
I look forward to our continued work in this Committee in reaching consensus on funding priorities, because there can be little question that many of us share common goals for the American people.
I believe that this Committee has a responsibility to insure that the Department is maximizing its resources in accordance with its appropriations requests, and that those funds are being used for the greatest possible social good. Good.
Today, we are happy to welcome representatives from the Office of Justice Programs (OJP), the Criminal Division, and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), and to evaluate their appropriations requests. The Office of Justice Programs (OJP) is seeking $4.2 billion in FY 2002, compared to $5.2 for FY 2001. The primary difference in these being the reduction in the COPS program which reached its goal of hiring and deploying 100,000 officers nationwide.
Page 230 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
The Criminal Division is seeking increases in funding from $110 million in FY 2001 to $230 million in FY 2002. Lastly, the COPS program has been reduced by $228 million for FY 2002, while leaving $180 million for hiring School Resource Officers, and increasing technology assistance funding in other areas.
While we have much to be proud of in terms of the good work that is being done in the Department of Justice, I believe that much more work and effort ought to be spent to reform the system with an eye towards prevention, rehabilitation and alternatives to incarceration.
In our last hearing on this issue two weeks ago we began to discuss the ongoing problem of drugs, and what many of us on this Committee believe are systemic problems with our enforcement directives in the War on Drugs. To address this and other very serious problems we must focus in on what has been proven to work and what hasn't.
We should increase our support and build on our success, while at the same time we must learn from the mistakes of failed policies and failed programs, cut our losses and move on. For example, on May 10 at the White House the President stressed the need to expand drug treatment in the criminal justice system. Programs such as these have been proven to be effective because they seek to address the root of the problem, as opposed to merely incarcerating offenders, which most experts would agree, does little to address causes of abuse and recidivism.
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics over 600,000 offenders a year are returning from America's prisons to their communities. This is encouraging because it demonstrates that rehabilitation works. However, I am concerned by the President's FY 2002 budget request, which decreases funding for reentry programs. It makes little sense to reduce what has been proven to work.
Page 231 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
We must also continue to address and end the discriminatory and unfair practice of racial profiling which disproportionately effects minority men in this country. So while I applaud the recent attention given to this issue by the Attorney General, I believe that much more support and action is needed to increase awareness of the problem, so that we can begin to change the culture of racial profiling that exists in our Department of Justice. I hope that the Department will do all that it can to help end this insidious practice.
We must also do much more in our efforts to diversify the Department of Justice by hiring more minorities and women so that the Department reflects the rich diversity of the American people. To the Department's credit, hiring of Hispanics exceeded relevant civilian labor force representation, according to a recent OPM study. However, the same study shows that while African-Americans generally exceeded their relevant civilian labor force representation in 16 federal executive departments, less than 16% of those employed by the DOJ were African-American. And while the DOJ consisted of 37.7% women, that number was over 9% less than what it should have been based on overall hiring percentages of women in the civilian work force.
In all, our policies are due for a serious reexamination. I look forward to hearing your suggestions, and to our continued work together on providing sufficient resources for the Department of Justice and the American people.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SMITH. All Members' opening statements will be a part of the record.
Page 232 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Let me thank the witnesses for your work and commitment, and I know that your commitment is continuing. And I know that most of the Members of this Committee are lawyers and appreciate very much a great part of the work that the Department of Justice has to do.
Let me probe you on some concerns that I have with respect to some of our particular focuses.
And Mr. Justus, you were very certainly pronounced and you had anecdotal stories about the COPS program. I am aware of the IG's audit. I always think that we can improve upon what we have.
But I do note that over the course of the last 10 years or so or the period of time, let's say, that the COPS program has been implemented and the number of small jurisdictions and large jurisdictions that have utilized it, I do believe there is a correlation in the decrease in crime to the COPS program.
I'm concerned with taking $228 million out of the program. And your focus certainly has a high callingschool resource offices.
On the other hand, I am concerned about an oversaturation of, in quotes, ''police-like presence'' in our schools. And I would hope that we would have a collaboration to deal with mental health services, counselors and others, who could equally gain the confidence of the particular student.
Page 233 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
And so this is something I really am going to oppose, but I want to pose the question: What made you feel comfortable in focusing in this direction on that? And I'm going to ask you that very briefly, because I have some questions for the other individuals.
Mr. JUSTUS. Because I think the demand is out there in the community for the school resource officers, but we do have other programs that I think work in areas like you described, partnerships with community groups.
We have the school-based partnership, which we put $30 million into 275 law enforcement agencies, to work with community groups to reduce violence in our schools and among our young people.
We have an after-school program in which we work with community groups, faith-based groups, to try to develop activities such as through PAL for kids after school.
We have a program that we are involved in called Safe Schools/Healthy Students where we work in cooperation with the Department of Education and Health and Human Services to get community groups involved in all aspects of young people's lives.
So we aren't just focusing all our efforts on school resource officers.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. And I appreciate that. If I might just interject just for a moment, and I won't pursue it. I'll work with you directly on my concern.
Page 234 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 That speaks to the question that those kinds of resources, counselors, may be much better suited for school resource officers when I think the COPS program with fixing is one that has been evident, or there has been evidence that what we have seen in a diminishing of crime statistics, whether rural or urban, have been very effective.
Let me just, and I will engage you, but my time is short, so I thank you very much for that. I would like to discuss further with youI continually always raise the questions of professional development of any kind of police officers, and I would like to talk to you with whether we've got any funding in there for continued police professional development as it relates to civil rights and human rights.
Mr. JUSTUS. I would be happy to, Congresswoman.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank you very much.
Let me generally just speak to some concerns that I have as I look at the budgeting process, whoever may answer this.
I'm wondering if we've got a lot of dollars here, do we haveI understand the attorney general is investigating the issue of racial profiling. Where is the funding going to come to be remedial in the results of that?
And then secondarily, let me say, as it relates to Mr. Horowitz, I looked at the Criminal Division, has a lot to do with training of our prosecutors. Very fine work. We've got very fine prosecutors. But let me just say that all of us, all of us Mr. Horowitz, have absolute mud, egg, and whatever else we can have on our faces regarding Mr. McVeigh.
Page 235 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
And as I note that you are dealing with training of prosecutors, though the light has been on the FBI, none of us can shun the total embarrassment of the insensitivity to the victims' families and all that goes in it, along with our concern for justice. And rightly so we're concerned for justice.
But the prosecutors also have the responsibility to probe and probe and probe and probe, and why did that not secure for them all of the documents that they needed to have, along with the chagrin that I assume the FBI is facing of not presenting them all the documents? If you would answer that question?
Can I have an additional 30 seconds for him to answer, please, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. SMITH. Yes, if the witness will please answer the question? Thank you.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you.
Mr. HOROWITZ. I will.
I agree with you, Congresswoman, that prosecutors need to be trained to perform at the highest ethical standards. They have a responsibility to carry out their duties fully but fairly. And we certainlyI know in my former officespent a fair amount of time on training, and just for that reason.
Page 236 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
With regard to the McVeigh case specifically, I can't sit here and tell you I have answers. Obviously, the inspector general is reviewing that issue, and I'd be hesitant to speculate as to what the reasons were. But I certainly understand your concerns about the importance of prosecutors taking a role in making sure that ethical responsibilities are carried out fully.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the Chairman. I thank the Ranking Member. I am going to pursue those lines of questioning with you all individually or in our respective offices on that, and I appreciate it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Jackson Lee.
The gentleman from North Carolina
Ms. JACKSON LEE. And thank you, Mr. Scott.
Mr. SMITH [continuing]. Mr. Coble, is recognized for his questions.
Mr. COBLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have another meeting I've got to attend, but I want to put this question to the panelists before I leave.
Page 237 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 Each of your offices has a role in anti-cybercrime efforts. Tell us, if you will, how you all coordinate with one another, A; B, with States and localities; and, C, with private businesses in fighting cybercrime.
Mr. HOROWITZ. One of the things that our Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section has worked diligently on is to develop relationships with industry to prevent a situation from where we are imposing our views and positions on industry but are working cooperatively with them to understand the problems they have in gathering evidence and producing it to us and trying to reach a solution that works for our concerns, reaches our concerns, but doesn't unnecessarily interfere with their business operation.
We also are trying to put together networks throughout the country of State, local, and Federal prosecutors to coordinate when we have a cybercrime attack, for example, in a locality, so that we can respond effectively to it. And that's one of the networks we are trying to build, not just here but internationally as well.
Mr. COBLE. And do you all do that with one another, I presume, in an open and continuing manner?
Ms. LEARY. Yes, we do, sir. Although speaking for the Office of Justice Programs, our efforts are really focused on helping State and local law enforcement agencies deal with cybercrime.
We sponsor the National White Collar Crimes Training Partnership in West Virginia, and that maintainsthey do a lot of training and technical assistance and provide information about best practices and emerging trends to State and local law enforcement agencies across the country. They also run centralized services so that an individual who has a complaint about fraud or Internet kind of complaints can register that complaint there, and the information gets shared, and local and State law enforcement agencies can better pursue it. So it kind of works in tandem.
Page 238 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. COBLE. I've got you.
Mr. JUSTUS. Similar to Office of Justice Programs, we are very active with State and local law enforcement in providing them with technology, giving them training and technical assistance so they can deal with issues like this.
Mr. COBLE. I thank you.
Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I am going to yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. BARR. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Justus, I noticed I think that $38 million have been requested for Project Child Safe, for trigger locks?
Ms. LEARY. That's an Office of Justice Programs.
Mr. BARR. Ms. Leary?
Ms. LEARY. That's correct.
Page 239 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 Mr. BARR. To ensure that child safety locks are put on guns?
Ms. LEARY. That's right. This isthere's actually a State program in Texas now, which is called Project Child Safe, and this is a national version of it. And it is to provide funding so that every firearm can have a child safety lock.
Mr. BARR. How many people actually use safety locks, of those that are given to them? I know when you purchase a handgun now, you're given a safety lock. Does the department have any way of knowing how many of those are used or how many are just discarded?
Ms. LEARY. I really cannot answer that, but I will check and see if there is any background information about the number of child safety locks that are actually used. I will check on that and get back to you.
Mr. BARR. I mean, $38 million is a lot of money. Isn't theredoesn't that also contemplate additional monies, matching monies from the States?
Ms. LEARY. Yes, it does.
Mr. BARR. Where's all that money going to go ifand how did you all come up with $38 million for this? If handguns are already required to have a safety lock with them when they're sold, and a lot of folks already have safety locks anywayI think there are something like only 65 million handguns nationallyhow did you all come up withthat basically would be $76 million if you have $38 million that the feds are proposing plus an equal amount from the States.
Page 240 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
It seems like an awful lot of money for somethinggranted, it sounds good. I mean, how can anybody argue with safety locks for the children?
But how do you come up with that figure and how do you haveI'm mystified as to how you would have any idea whether that money is going to be used wisely, whether it's going to have any impact. Did you all do a study before coming up with this amount of money?
Ms. LEARY. I think actually the program was quite successful in Texas. And I think there is a sense there are a lot of handguns out there that don't currently have child safety locks.
Mr. BARR. A lot of people have a sense that there's a lot of things out there, but we're talking about hard dollars here, taxpayer dollars.
I'd appreciate it if you could provide us with some background as to how you all came up with this, and if there are any studies other than the fact that, granted, it might have worked great in Texas. But what research has been done to justify basically proposing $76 million for child locks?
Ms. LEARY. I'll be happy to look into the background research on that and provide it to you.
Mr. BARR. I'd appreciate that.
Page 241 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Barr.
Mr. Scott yields his time to the gentleman from New York, Mr. Weiner, and he is recognized for his questions.
Mr. WEINER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Justus, is your name in any way responsible for your getting the job, or is it [Laughter.]
Mr. JUSTUS. In part. In part.
Mr. WEINER. Did you change the name?
About the COPS program, one of the critiques that we hear, and I'm very pleased to read such favorable testimony about it, one of the things that we've heard police departments around the country express some concern about is not the program, because the program has been one of the most democratic with a small ''D'' programs in all of government, 12,000-some-odd police departments, 82 percent of them police departments of less thanrepresenting police departments of less than 50,000 persons.
But one of the criticisms that has been made is that the Federal Government is funding these officers in the neighborhood of 110,000 to 115,000. And at the end of the program, police departments who might not have the ability to are being left to absorb the full cost of these officers.
Page 242 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
And many of us believe that the COPS program should be reauthorized with greater flexibility, theoretically a Republican concept, to allow for officers that are on the beat, for the Federal Government to have some role in keeping them on the beat. Is that the position of the Administration?
Mr. JUSTUS. I can't speak for the Administration. I am a career employee.
But what I can tell you is, we did a survey last fall of on-the-street officers. And during that survey, we reviewed all of the grants that expired, some 7,000 grants, and we found in those grants that 92 percent of the officers were retained after the grant had expired and their requirement for retention. So we're pleased with the retention that is occurring right now.
Mr. WEINER. Forgive me. Perhaps Ms. Leary or Mr. Horowitz can answer the question about whether or not it is the Administration's position that we should provide police departments that we have helped with the COPS funding additional funding or extended funding under the reauthorization to allow them to help in retaining officers.
Is someone here empowered to speak for the Administration on that point?
Ms. LEARY. I think what I can speak to is that the Administration is eager to provide the cops who have been funded thus far with better equipment, more technology, and so they're trying to make the funding more flexible and direct some of the dollars toward providing those technological tools and toward addressing the issue of school violence. And that's the
Page 243 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. WEINER. But in fact the COPS MORE program has been eliminated?
Ms. LEARY. Yes. But the technology money that is available through COPS has been increased, and COPS MORE was basically a way for police departments to add technology, and they had to do these calculations, which were extremely difficult to do, frankly, about
Mr. WEINER. Well, in fact, weren't thethe calculations, if you recall the history of this program, were in response to concerns by both parties here that money would be accountable, and that you'd be able to quantify the COPS money as being accountable for an additional cop on the street.
So when the COPS MORE program was eliminated, the Civilian Hire Program, which allowed COPS to get out, and I even think you used these words, to ''get out from behind the desk and get out on the beat,'' to hire a less-expensive civilian to allow a more expensive and more skilled, theoretically, police officer. That program's been eliminated by the Bush Administration, hasn't it?
Ms. LEARY. I think they have shifted the emphasis, and it is looking more toward providing technology and school resource officers.
Mr. WEINER. So when the president stood up and talked about how it is necessary for us to have a zero tolerance, the other day, and stood with police officers, in fact the COPS program as it is envisioned for the future going forward is to have a dramatically reduced emphasis on actually hiring cops?
Page 244 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Ms. LEARY. For 2002, that is what the budget reflects, but I really can't speak to where the Administration is beyond that.
Mr. WEINER. Okay. Well, we're going to have to do a reauthorization bill; we can just discuss 2002.
But my concern is whether or not the Administration's position is that despite the successes of the COPS program, which areoverwhelmingly by percentage terms, the funding for the COPS program went to hire police officers. Is that right, Mr. Justus?
Mr. JUSTUS. That's right.
Mr. WEINER. Right. And here going forward, that is no longer going to be the emphasis of the COPS program. Is that fair to say, Ms. Leary?
Ms. LEARY. I think the emphasis is onthere's hiring for additional 1,500 officers, but the emphasis for those officers is in deploying them in the area of school safety.
Mr. WEINER. Got it.
Now, some police departments were notified in the middle of a 3-year grant process that their funding for civilians was going to bewas going to be stopped, right? Weren't lettersdidn't letters just go out, telling police departments that they ought not apply for the third year of the 3-year civilianization?
Page 245 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. JUSTUS. MORE Civilian was a 1-year grant. And so there is not a renewal. It's a 1-year grant.
Mr. WEINER. The civilianization?
Mr. JUSTUS. Right. It's a 1-year grant.
Mr. WEINER. Okay.
Mr. JUSTUS. The UHP, the Universal Hiring grants are 3-year grants.
Mr. WEINER. Got it.
Let me just saydo I have time for one additional question, Mr. Chairman? I can do a second round, if you like.
Mr. SMITH. We're not going to have a second round. You can submit written questions, if you'd like. But in any case, the gentleman is recognized for an additional minute.
Mr. WEINER. Well, thank you.
One of the things that I am concerned aboutswitching subjects for a momentand I'm not sure if this is Ms. Leary or Mr. Horowitzis last year this Subcommittee pushed for and this Congress passed $30 million for DNA backlog elimination. And in having discussions with folks at the Justice Department, we have no way to quantify the DNA backlog as it exists out there in the country, that there has been no effort to collect the information, that we have anecdotal information that says that there are evidence kits in New York that 12,000-some-odd kits. We have a third-party independent study that was done anonymously that came up with an estimate of the numbers.
Page 246 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Does Justice have any intention to formally request this information from police departments so that we can determine where to go next in terms of allocating additional funds for doing DNA analysis on all of these evidence kits that are sitting out there unanalyzed that Congress has expressed an interest, but we have no way of quantifying the problem?
Ms. LEARY. I will be happy to send you something on that, Mr. Weiner, because we do need to have that information. We are making efforts to find out the exact parameters of the backlog problem.
Mr. WEINER. Okay. And I would say to you, if there's any discrepancy about whether you have the jurisdiction to require it from police departmentsbecause I know some of them may perceive this as being an embarrassmentI am sure Members of the House here, and I am sure this Committee, would be open to forcing police departments to notify.
Because one of the things we have to do is, if we're going to have a national DNA database, we can't just have offender samples in the database without having the evidence samples for it to work.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Weiner.
The gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Chabot, is recognized for his questions.
Page 247 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. CHABOT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Justus, I apologize for not having heard your oral presentation. I did read over your written report, and you mention in the written report the case of a police officer, Sergeant Webb in Mt. Healthy Junior High School in Cincinnati, which is in my congressional district. I want to thank you for mentioning that.
And the entire community was grateful for Sergeant Webb's quick thinking and his heroism in heading off a potentially deadly situation. And we certainly do owe a considerable gratitude to police officers all over this country who have really saved an awful lot of lives.
And I appreciate the fact that the COPS program has had a number of success stories. Of course, there have also been some reports by the Heritage Foundation, for example, and the nonpartisan Urban Institute that are perhaps less favorable.
And I wanted you to address one thing. You had asserted in your statement that more than 73,000 police officers are on the beat as a direct result of the COPS program. How do you explain the results of the Urban Institute study that concluded that under the most optimistic scenario, the number of police officers will peak in 2001, this year, at 57,000. And I'm advised that that number is backed up by the inspector general's own research concluded in April 1999.
Would you address that issue, please?
Page 248 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. JUSTUS. The Urban Institute study that was released was the first half of a study. The second half will be released some time this summer.
But the data that was used was older data. It was olderexamples of grants that aren't representative of current grants.
They used, for example, the MORE '95 grants, which used a different system of accounting. So they estimated the peak that the on-the-street number would be some 68,000, and our own survey which is quite extensivewe contact every grantee that's gotten a hiring grant, and then we do a stratified random sampling of our MORE Technology, MORE Civilian grants, using a statistical process, technique, that was approved by the Bureau of Justice Statistics.
So we used quite an extensive and quite a detailed survey to arrive at the 73,600 figure last fall.
Mr. CHABOT. Okay. Also, is it true that some estimates have up to 41 percent of the participating police departments using COPS funds to supplant or to substitute for local funds already earmarked to pay officers' salary? And if so, isn't this practice contrary to the mission of the COPS program approved by Congress?
Mr. JUSTUS. We do extensive monitoring with site visits of all the grantees, particularly, you know, MORE grantees. And when we find a case that looks like supplanting, it goes to our legal division, to our general counsel office, and they are reviewed, investigated.
Page 249 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
And we find very, very few cases of actual supplanting. Where we do, we go back and recoup the government's money.
Mr. CHABOT. So you've found some, but you would dispute the fact that it is as high as that particular
Mr. JUSTUS. It's verythe numbers are surprisingly low and particularly given the numbers we end up investigating. We spend a lot of time monitoring and reviewing prospective cases of supplanting. The IG does reviews; OJP Office of Comptroller does some on-site visits. So there is some extensive monitoring that is done of all the grantees.
Mr. CHABOT. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, several of the questions that I was going to ask have been previously asked. So at this time, I would like to yield the remaining time I have to Mr. Barr.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Barr is recognized.
Mr. BARR. I thank the gentleman from Ohio.
Who should I address the question to regarding the Violence Against Women Act request? Ms. Leary?
There's a substantial increase in that, close to I guess about 40 percent increase. What specifically does the Administration propose to do with that substantial increase?
Page 250 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Ms. LEARY. We would be using that in part to enhance existing programs and
Mr. BARR. The what?
Ms. LEARY. It is to enhance existing programs and to create some new programs, new programs in the area of disabled women who are victimized and abused, new programs in providing safe havens for children who are involved in domestic violence, and new programs involving elder abuse and violence.
I can give you the numbers. $31 million will go to expanding the encouraging arrest policies and enforcement of protection orders program; $15 million for the rural domestic violence enforcement programthat's an enhancement.
Mr. BARR. For the which?
Ms. LEARY. Rural domestic violence. $15 million for the Safe Havens for Children that I mentioned. $7.5 million for a new discretionary grant program, and that would include training and information on domestic violence, sexual assault and the like for women with disabilities. And then $5 million of that will go toward the elder abuse project that I mentioned.
Mr. BARR. Okay, thank you.
Page 251 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Barr.
The gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Conyers, Ranking Member of the full Judiciary Committee, is recognized for his questions.
Mr. CONYERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Scott.
I would like to focus on drug policy in the criminal justice system, which has had a serious change since the '80's since the war on drugs was declared.
And I would like to ask Ms. Leary and Mr. Horowitz, are you aware of the discussion that goes on with reference to the war on drugs and race, that drug policies and enforcement have disproportionately affected African-Americans?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, I certainly understand that concern and the issue being raised. I'm not sure if you're referring to a particular article or a particular journal, but I understand
Mr. CONYERS. No, I'm referring to the fact of the matter that people of color are disproportionately affected by the war on drugs in which, for example, African-Americans use about the same percentage of drugs as everybody else, but they get arrested 34 percent of the time, prosecuted 55 percent of the time, sentenced 74 percent of the time.
Page 252 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 Is this new information or old stuff for you?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Not, I have read statistics. I can't tell you that I've read any in-depth articles or journals about it. I would certainly be willing to take a look at that and sit down with the incoming head of the Criminal Division and discuss the matter with him.
Mr. CONYERS. Ms. Leary, have you had experience or contact with this kind of discussion?
Ms. LEARY. Yes, I certainly have, and especially as a prosecutor on the local level in Massachusetts and then in DC as an AUSA. Of course, we prosecute both local and Federal crimes, and there's a lot of discussion about this particular issue.
At the Office of Justice Programs, we focus our efforts primarily on prevention and treatment. We provide through a wide range of our programs, both in the juvenile justice arena and adult drug prevention programs, education outreach and the like, and
Mr. CONYERS. But incarceration has been the strategy of choice at the Federal level. That's what has accounted for the nearly tripling of the prison system in the United States. These are people arrested for possession, some for low-level sales, and that's whyso this is a massively important subject in terms of our strategies, namely the prosecution of low-level, peripheral users, nonviolent people, who are swelling the prison system as we speak.
Page 253 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 Mr. HOROWITZ. Congressman, I certainly think, from the Criminal Division's standpoint, one of the issues, one of the things we want to focus on in working with the Federal prosecutors at least around the country, is on bigger picture, larger drug prosecutions toI don't believe that local prosecutors, local Federal prosecutors, should be doing, as you indicated, smaller level drug cases.
And I think one of the things that is important for us certainly in the Criminal Division to do is try and understand a bigger picture and make sure we are doing the cases that should appropriately be brought at the Federal level but working cooperatively with our State and local prosecutors and law enforcement to make sure that they are pursuing matters at the State and local level.
Mr. CONYERS. Well, I am glad you realize that. But do you know that we have mandatory sentencing for these low-level crimes, plus we have disparity between crack and cocaine possessions and sales that again affect the color of those who are being prosecuted and locked up? True or false?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, every court at least that has looked at this, Congressman, has determined that the statistical presentations have not warranted overturning convictions or going beyond that. I understand that there is statistics that demonstrate different percentages amongst different groups being prosecuted
Mr. CONYERS. Can I get an additional minute, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. SMITH. The gentleman is recognized for an additional minute.
Page 254 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. CONYERS. It isn't a point that the prosecutions themselves are unfair; it's the strategy of targeting low-level people, inner-city communities, street-corner sales, where you will net people of color more easily prosecuted.
So it isn't that the prosecution is faulty. They were possessing, they were involved in sales, so it's not a matter that the court blew it. They were only operating within the context of a strategy that emanates from the Department of Justice and, more specifically, your agency.
Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, as I said, I don't believe, in the efforts that we've undertaken in the Criminal Division certainly in the last few years, have been geared to going at a low level of drug dealing.
Mr. CONYERS. Oh, they sure have.
Mr. HOROWITZ. What we've tried to do is expand and think globally and nationally as well, as we target our prosecutions and investigations and where we investigate and prosecute.
Mr. CONYERS. Well, can you show me some numbers? I'll get some numbers for you that show that that's exactly what hasn't been going on, and that's the purpose of my comments.
Have you had a chance or are you familiar with the Sentencing Project, Mark Mauer, executive director?
Page 255 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. HOROWITZ. I can't say that I am familiar
Mr. CONYERS. Okay. Well, I'd like to send both of you that information, and I'd like you tolet's get into a written discussion about it.
Mr. HOROWITZ. Be happy to.
Mr. CONYERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Conyers.
The gentleman from Arkansas, Mr. Hutchinson, is recognized for his questions.
Mr. HUTCHINSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I wanted to ask a couple questions of Mr. Horowitz. In reference to the McDade law that was passed I guess the last Congress, which was of concern to me as to how that would impact our Federal prosecutors, what effect has the McDade law had on the Federal prosecutors across the country?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, Congressman, first of all, I want to reiterate what I said earlier, which is obviously we should be holding our prosecutors to a high ethical standard. They should be able to meet their ethical obligations.
Page 256 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
But the law itself that you mentioned has had several unfortunate consequences and has significantly impacted our ability to undertake what are otherwise lawful law enforcement activity.
In particular, the focus on the State of Oregon, which had a bar rule that prohibited lawyers from engaging in deception, and the bar committee there disciplined the lawyer in a civil matter for engaging in deception.
Well, obviously we as Federal prosecutors, when the FBI, the DEA, the Customs Service come to us for advice on undercover activities that they want to engage inand they do come to us and they're supposed to come to us for legal analysis, we obviously at that point are counseling them on engaging in deceptive activities.
The decision in Oregon has effectively shut down our ability, the FBI's ability, the DEA's ability and all the other law enforcement agencies' abilities, to carry out undercover investigations and drug prosecutions, white collar crime cases, child pornography matters, you could go down the lineorganized crime matters.
And indeed, within the last few months, the State bar proposed a fix that the Oregon Supreme Court just struck down unanimously. And so we're back in the position we were in.
And I can tell you from my experience, I think that most defense lawyers would want to have the FBI, the DEA agents, the Customs Service agents consulting with prosecutors before undertaking undercover activity to get legal guidance rather than just have them go out uncounseled, which is going to be the result if they are going to be able to take that kind of activity in a State like Oregon.
Page 257 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. HUTCHINSON. Has there been any other areas of difficulty besides Oregon?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, the other main concern is the issue of contact with represented parties, and the problem that we faced in, for example, organized crime cases where house counsel comes in and claims to represent all individuals, or in a corporate crime setting where an organization that has engaged in criminal conduct, perhaps the general counsel comes to us and says they represent everybody.
And that would impact our ability to talk with, for example, low-level employees who don't want to be represented by the general counsel. It would prevent the FBI fromus working with the FBI and other law enforcement agents, for example, to go interview people who might want to be interviewed by the department.
Mr. HUTCHINSON. Has the department created any new set of guidelines under McDade?
Mr. HOROWITZ. We have created an internal office to counsel prosecutors who have questions before they undertake steps that they fear might result in discipline, and that's worked quite well. We've sent guidance to the field generally.
But the other problem that we have is that lawyers in the department who have bar admissions for more than one State are uncertain, when they undertake activity, which State they need to worry about. Similarly, when criminal conduct crosses a number of different State jurisdictions, which bar rules do we have to worry about?
Page 258 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. HUTCHINSON. Could we have a copy of those guidelines that you have?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Let me speak with our Office of Professional Responsibility and see what they
Mr. HUTCHINSON. And do you see any effort that Congress should undertake in order to remedy these difficulties?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, I think that the main problems have arisen in those areas, and it is certainly an issue that I would want to consult with the new head of the Criminal Division on and get his input on, as well as work through the department, before laying out my personal views on what should be done. I would certainly be willing to bring that back and do that.
Mr. HUTCHINSON. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Hutchinson.
The gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Delahunt, is recognized for his questions.
Page 259 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 Mr. DELAHUNT. I thank the Chairman.
Mr. Horowitz, who has been nominated as the new chair of the Criminal Division?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Michael Chertoff.
Mr. DELAHUNT. Are you familiar with an article that Mr. Chertoff did relative to McDade, the McDade law?
Mr. HOROWITZ. I'm somewhat familiar with it.
Mr. DELAHUNT. Right. And he supports the McDade law, at least in that article, didn't he?
Mr. HOROWITZ. I will let him speak for himself as to why
Mr. DELAHUNT. Right. Well, I've read the article, and my conclusion, and I guess I am speaking to my colleague over there, Mr. Hutchinson, I would suggest that he reads the article and
Mr. HUTCHINSON. I got the message loud and clear. [Laughter.]
Mr. DELAHUNT. But you know, Mr. Horowitz, while we're on this, we have the Oregon case, okay? Now, do we have other cases?
Page 260 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. HOROWITZ. When you say other cases
Mr. DELAHUNT. Other cases that you feel have been impacted by
Mr. HOROWITZ. There are a series of cases that I think have been impacted by our inability to
Mr. DELAHUNT. You think have been impacted?
Mr. HOROWITZ. I believe have been.
Mr. DELAHUNT. You believe, but you don't know?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, I can go back, Congressman, and
Mr. DELAHUNT. Will you forward to me a list of those cases?
Mr. HOROWITZ. I will forward to you what we can send up. One of the problems that we have is, a number of these issues are contacts involving grand jury matters, and obviously
Mr. DELAHUNT. Well, we'll leave aside the grand jury matters.
Page 261 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, but
Mr. DELAHUNT. Could you enumerate for me those that you are aware of that would not jeopardize the prosecution or an investigation to date, each and every one of them, Mr. Horowitz? Can you do that for this Committee?
Mr. HOROWITZ. I will go back and sit down with our Professional Responsibility Office and go through what they have and what
Mr. DELAHUNT. Right. How many do you think there might be?
Mr. HOROWITZ. I don't know as I sit here, Congressman.
Mr. DELAHUNT. I mean, 100, 200?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, I don't know how many undercover cases, for example, are undertaken in Oregon
Mr. DELAHUNT. I'll tell you what. Could you enumerate them, and then for those that you feel it is kind of in the ''would have'' category, which might jeopardize, could you give us a statisticalcould you provide us with some statistics in terms of
Mr. HOROWITZ. I could, for example, go back and speak with the law enforcement agencies on the number of undercover cases they would normally undertake in a State such as Oregon, because they would have difficulty
Page 262 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. DELAHUNT. I'm not normallyI'm not interested in normally, Mr. Horowitz. I'm interested in what has actually happened with the application of the McDade law.
Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, but what has happened, prosecutors haven't gone
Mr. DELAHUNT. Well, all you've got to do is go back to the United States Attorneys Office in Oregon or the DEA or the FBI or whatever investigative agency is there in Portland, Oregon, and ask them.
Mr. HOROWITZ. I will do that.
Mr. DELAHUNT. Don't just speculate. You can ask them.
Mr. HOROWITZ. I will do that.
Mr. DELAHUNT. And you'll do that. I appreciate that.
Ms. Leary, when did you serve in Middlesex?
Ms. LEARY. From 1982 to 1985. I served under Scott Harshbarger, and Tom Riley was the first assistant then.
Page 263 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 Mr. DELAHUNT. All right, well, welcome.
Ms. LEARY. Thank you.
Mr. DELAHUNT. In terms of the Weed and Seed program, have there been follow-up research like a year, 2 years, 5 years? The program began, it was under the first Bush Administration.
Ms. LEARY. That's correct. I will be happy to send you the studies that we have.
Mr. DELAHUNT. Do you know anything off the top of your head? Does it showI mean
Ms. LEARY. It shows a positive impact.
Mr. DELAHUNT. Right. Do you have any interesting statistics that might enlighten the Committee?
Ms. LEARY. I can tell you, within individual Weed and Seed neighborhoods, designated neighborhoods, we have seen some pretty dramatic reductions. We had about a 20 percent reduction in one of the Weed and Seed sites in DC. But I will
Mr. DELAHUNT. There was a program in Chelsea I remember years ago.
Page 264 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Ms. LEARY. Excuse me?
Mr. DELAHUNT. In Chelsea there was the Weed and Seed program.
Ms. LEARY. That's right.
Mr. DELAHUNT. I wonderI think it would be really beneficial, if it doesn't exist, what's the useto take a look-see at the long-term impact of Weed and Seed. I don't know if that research has ever been done, but I would be interested to taketo review and see those programs that were initiated at the beginning of the program and see what it looks like at different time intervals just to give us a sense of their efficacy in the long term and whether they really arewhether there's a heavy local investment such that it's sustained over a period of time.
Ms. LEARY. Yes, I'll be happy to provide that because
Mr. DELAHUNT. I mean, it's really a community prosecution concept and
Ms. LEARY. It is, and it works hand in hand with community prosecution. It's a great fit with community policing and community prosecution.
And in fact, in your district, there are some pretty successful examples.
Page 265 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. DELAHUNT. Right. I think we had one in Brockton for a while.
Ms. LEARY. That is right, and Lowell.
Mr. DELAHUNT. Marianne Hinkle ran it, is running it.
Ms. LEARY. Yes.
Mr. DELAHUNT. Can I have one more question, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. SMITH. The gentleman is recognized for an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. DELAHUNT. In talking about VAWA, has there ever been a study done relative to the relationship between domestic violence, violence against women, and the rather dramatic decline in the level of all categories of violent crime over the past decade?
As you well know, domestic violence programs were initiated in the late '70's, continued, they've grown, they've been replicated all over the country.
My own observation has been that there is, if you examine the history of inmates incarcerated in our major penal institutions, they're clearly either the victims, witnesses to or the byproduct of a violent family.
Page 266 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
And I wonder if that nexus, that relationship, has ever been reviewed.
Ms. LEARY. Yes. There are studies on that. I'll be happy to provide them to you. And as you can well imagine, they show that, for instance, in the case of children who are victims of domestic violence either directly or through observationthey're part of the family and this is going on all the timethat it creates a climate that produces oftentimes children who grow up to perpetrate violence or who become victimized themselves, and they get caught in this cycle.
There's a lot of research on that, and I'll be very happy to provide it.
Mr. DELAHUNT. Thank you.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Delahunt.
The gentleman from Florida, Mr. Keller, is recognized for his questions.
Mr. KELLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have questions about two areas, one about the COPS program and second about the criminal enforcement of an intellectual property law.
So let's start with the COPS program, and Mr. Justus, you can take a crack at this. And maybe Ms. Leary will have something to say.
Page 267 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
I want to make sure that I understand the gist of what we're doing here, and my reading of this is, we're going to spend more money on crime-fighting technology, about the same amount of money on school resource officers, and less money on hiring new police officers for community policing.
Mr. JUSTUS. That's correct. That's accurate.
Mr. KELLER. Okay. And it's that third prong that's probably going to have a little controversy, the less money for community policing.
And when I say controversy, at least in my jurisdictionI'm from Orlando, where we're rapidly growingand so I asked my Orange County sheriff, a guy named Kevin Beary, and I asked our local police officer chief of police, Jerry Demings, who's here today from Orlando, what they thought about this. And they love the COPS program. We had to add 60 new cops a year just to keep up with growth.
And so I want to tell you what they say and then what other folks say, and I want your opinion.
They say that this is a wonderful program, it's just where it needs to be, we don't want to have to rely on these local law enforcement grants because there's too much red tape.
Other folks said, well, the original purpose was to hire 100,000 cops; we've hired 100,000 cops, and to the extent you feel you need to hire even more, just use money from the local law enforcement grants.
Page 268 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
With that as background, let me start asking a couple of questions.
First of all, can jurisdictions like the one I represent, say, Orange County, use local law enforcement grants to hire additional cops for community policing purposes?
Mr. JUSTUS. Can they in 2002?
Mr. KELLER. Yes, sir.
Mr. JUSTUS. No. There will be no new grants. The 115,000, the grants that are currently out there, are obligated, and your jurisdiction, if they have a grant, can continue to draw down on those grants for the full 3 years.
Mr. KELLER. Okay. I understand the COPS money grant will be gone after this budget.
Mr. JUSTUS. Right.
Mr. KELLER. Is there other local law enforcement grants, just the generic grants, that if they decide to use money from those grants can be used to hire additional police officers?
Mr. JUSTUS. Not police officers, not COPS grants, but school resource officers. We have, as you've noted, $180 million in there for school resource officers.
Page 269 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Ms. LEARY. The Local Law Enforcement Block Grant has as one of its purpose areas training and hiring of law enforcement.
Mr. KELLER. Okay, that's what I'm getting at.
Now when I threw that back at the Orange County sheriff he said, yeah, but there's in his perception a lot more red tape associated with using money from the local law enforcement grants to hire cops than it would be to just get money straight from the COPS program.
What's your thoughts on that, Ms. Leary?
Ms. LEARY. Well, to be candid, there probably is more red tape. But nevertheless, States are able to manage the process and have been doing so for many, many years.
And I think one of the reasons that people cite red tape is that there are seven purpose areas for which that money can be used, and so it's kind of difficult for an individual police department to gain the leverage to push the use of the funds toward that particular purpose sometimes.
Mr. KELLER. This is a tough issue, and I appreciate both your candor on that.
But let me switch to Mr. Horowitz and ask you about the enforcement of criminal intellectual laws. I just had breakfast with a bunch of leaders of the software industry, and they told me their biggest concern was the enforcement of criminal laws dealing with copyright infringement, intellectual property. The gist of what they said is that a lot of their folks who steal movies and show them on the Internet are often kids, college students who have no fear of $100 million civil lawsuit, but they would fear spending about 6 months in jail.
Page 270 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
But they're frustrated because the assistant U.S. attorneys have a lot bigger fish to fry on a daily basis, and they're not spending the money and the resources they believe to enforce these criminal laws.
Reading from your remarks, you indicated that one of the things you guys are going to do on this budget is to enhance the criminal prosecution efforts of intellectual property laws in seven key jurisdictions. Is that right?
Mr. HOROWITZ. That is.
Mr. KELLER. Is the middle district of Florida one of those seven key jurisdictions?
Mr. HOROWITZ. I don't believe it is, but let me double-check on that.
Mr. KELLER. Would it kill you to make that one of your key jurisdictions? [Laughter.]
We're home to Disney World and Universal Studios, so let me tell you what I told them, and you tell me if I'm giving good advice or not. I told them that it's my understanding that the U.S. attorneys have discretion on what type of things to prosecute, and that if you wanted more rigorous enforcement of these laws, go have a chat with your U.S. attorney, that it's pretty much a locally based decision. Is that accurate?
Page 271 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. HOROWITZ. It is, and I think that's pretty sound advice to give them, to speak with their U.S. attorneys, make them aware of the problems that the particular constituents in the community are facing.
One of the things that I think you will be pleased to know is we just actually on May 1 through 3 held a training sessionour Computer Crime and Intellectual Property sessionfor prosecutors from around the country, because one of the problems we also see is a lack of understanding of the significance of the problem and a concern or fear about an ability to understand, particularly the software theft that is going on. And so one of the things we try and do is get prosecutors from around the country to feel comfortable investigating these types of crimes and pursuing them.
Mr. KELLER. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Horowitz.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Keller.
The patient gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 minutes for his questions.
Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll yield briefly to the gentleman from New York. He had a follow-up question for Mr. Justus.
Page 272 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 Mr. WEINER. Thank you.
Mr. Justus, previously, I talked about the elimination of the second and third years, in some cases the third years of the COPS MORE program provide for civilianization. And you answered that it was a 1-year program.
Let me just read from a letter dated February 8 with your signature. ''In MORE program grant applications and grant owners manuals,''this, by the way, is a letter to the city of New York''In MORE program grant application and grant owners manuals we advised agencies that grant awards for civilians may be renewed for 2 additional years beyond the additional grant period contingent upon the availability of future appropriations.''
And your testimony here is that the Administration has no intention of requesting future appropriations?
Mr. JUSTUS. That's correct.
Mr. WEINER. And so, in fact, it is the position of the Administration to take a program that had originally been pitched as a 3-year program to make it a 1-year program, leaving cities like New York and other cities, frankly, who have benefited from the civilianization program are now not going to have the funds that they originally thought.
When an owners manual or the program grant manual says there are a couple more years coming down the pike and now to say there's not, that to me is taking a 3-year program and making it a 1-year program. I thank you.
Page 273 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Weiner.
The gentleman from Virginia continues to be recognized.
Mr. SCOTT. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Horowitz, in reference to the FBI and McVeigh situation, is there any evidence that any prosecutors knew that evidence had not been turned over? Is there any evidence the prosecutors knew? Do you want to answer that or not? Or can you answer it yes or no?
Mr. HOROWITZ. I personally do not know, and I have not undertaken any investigation myself. Obviously, that's been left to the inspector general to review.
Mr. SCOTT. It's being reviewed right now?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Correct.
Mr. SCOTT. Okay. I wasn't quite sure what kind of answer you gave to the gentleman from Michigan, the Ranking Member, about the crack/powder cocaine disparity. Is there a problem or not?
Some of us think we want to fix the problem, but if you don't see it as a problem, then obviously you're not going about to fix it. Is there a problem with the crack/powder cocaine disparity?
Page 274 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, on the issue of the disparity, Congressman, I would ask to reserve judgment. I think the assistant attorney general for the Criminal Division ought to be in place and be involved in that decision before I speak for him.
Mr. SCOTT. None of you are administrative political appointees, is that right?
Ms. LEARY. We are all career people.
Mr. HOROWITZ. Actually, I am in a political slot as chief of staff in the Criminal Division.
Mr. SCOTT. If you are not a political appointee, then you are somewhat reserved in speaking for the Administration. Can you speak for the Administration?
Mr. HOROWITZ. I can.
Mr. SCOTT. But you don't want to in this case?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, I think this is an issue that I think isthat the head of the Criminal Division ought to be a participant in, in reaching a conclusion on.
Mr. SCOTT. We have talked about low-level criminals getting hauled into Federal court. Is that a good idea or a bad idea, Mr. Horowitz?
Page 275 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. HOROWITZ. I'm sorry. Could you repeat that again?
Mr. SCOTT. Low-level defendants, low-level drug offenders being hauled into Federal court, clogging up the courts in a way that the chief justice has complained about.
Mr. HOROWITZ. I agree with you, Congressman, that we should not, at the Federal level, be focusing on small-level cases that don't have larger implications for the community. Although I will say that there are circumstances where prosecuting some small-level drug cases can make a difference in the community, and I have had personal experience with that in my old office.
Mr. SCOTT. Should they be prosecuted in the Federal court or the State court?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, the example that I can give you is, in New York City, we had an issue with drug dealing, marijuana dealing in Washington Square Park with individuals. The police department came to us with a problem where they had certain individuals who had 50, 60, 70 arrests and had never spent a day in jail and asked us to come in and to pursue the case federally. And we agreed to pursue only the most serious recidivists for what were essentially low-level drug dealing, but it meantthe community wanted to see that done.
Mr. SCOTT. How does the idea of not prosecuting low-level defendants, how is that consistent or inconsistent with Project Exile becoming nationalized?
Page 276 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. HOROWITZ. Well, I think in terms of decisionmaking of discretion being exercised by the U.S. attorneys in each district, they need to have in place an understanding and a policy of what cases should come federally, what gun prosecutions should be taken federally, and what cases can appropriately and should appropriately be going to the State prosecutors.
Mr. SCOTT. And what would you tell the chief justice as what the standard should be?
Mr. HOROWITZ. I think, Congressman, it varies from district to district, case to case. I certainly wouldn't speak for all the U.S. attorneys around the country and what problems they face.
I think that's one of the strengths of the system we have set up in the department with local U.S. attorneys analyzing and evaluating the problems in their districts. And I certainly wouldn't want to speak for them.
Mr. SCOTT. So do I understand you're saying it is up to the local prosecutor to makeset the standards?
Mr. HOROWITZ. I think in terms of what cases to take, what cases to pursue as Federal prosecutions, the U.S. attorneys generally make those decisions in their districts.
Page 277 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 Mr. SCOTT. How many U.S. attorneys are there?
Mr. HOROWITZ. Ninety-three I believe.
Mr. SCOTT. So you've got 90-some different standards. Somebody's going to say, bring them all. Is that a reasonable conclusion?
Mr. HOROWITZ. I don't know.
Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Chairman, could I have 1 additional minute? I wanted to ask
Mr. SMITH. The gentleman is recognized for an additional minute.
Mr. SCOTT. Ms. Leary said some real nice things about Weed and Seed, when we've had police officers tell me that they've been so successful in some public housing areas that now the crime rate within the public housing area in several jurisdictions within my district is significantly lower than the overall crime rate, they've done such a good job.
Could you tell us anything about the president's budget as it relates to drug interdiction in public housing programs and where that budget might be going, up or down or eliminated? Mr. Horowitz, do you know?
Page 278 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2 Ms. LEARY. I can't really
Mr. SCOTT. It's my understanding that he eliminated drug prevention programs in public housing in the HUD budget.
Mr. HOROWITZ. I don't know the answer to that as I sit here, Congressman. I could certainly go back and
Ms. LEARY. I can't speak to that, but I'll be happy to look into it and send you something.
I know that we do a lot of work. In Weed and Seed in particular, there's a heavy emphasis on public housing neighborhoods. In fact, the one that I worked on in DC, Langston-Carver, has one section 8 and one public housing development, and they make a tremendous effort to concentrate efforts in those neighborhoods. Drug prevention
Mr. SCOTT. Ms. Leary, you've done studies of what works and what doesn't work. There was a study done by the, I believe it was Harvard public health, Harvard School of Medicine, Harvard School of Public Health, with APT Associates from Cambridge and Chicago that did a longitudinal study. Are you familiar with that study?
Ms. LEARY. Study of?
Mr. SCOTT. Of what trajectory of getting into violence, a long-term following children and figuring out what the elements are in a particular community that these people
Page 279 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Ms. LEARY. Chicago?
Mr. SCOTT. Yes, in Chicago.
Ms. LEARY. Yes. Yes. The Chicago study.
Mr. SCOTT. Is thatare the results of that study being put to use?
Ms. LEARY. Yes. As a matter of fact, it is. And we are using the results of that study to provide models for other districts, other locales who want to know what works and what doesn't work when we are trying to address these problems. So, yes, we are.
And that's one of the things that OJP tries very hard to do, is to study what we're doing and extract the best principles from that, and the disseminate it, because that's what we're all about, is helping communities nationwide
Mr. SCOTT. Finally, are you familiar with the violence prevention protocols that four universities are working on, including Virginia Commonwealth University?
Ms. LEARY. Yes. And that's an example of the kind of work that we support, because they're studying it and they can develop protocols that work. And then we put them to use in training other communities.
Page 280 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Scott.
That concludes our hearing. Mr. Horowitz, Ms. Leary, Mr. Justus, thank you for your testimony today. And the Subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 5:42 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Material Submitted for the Hearing Record
Page 281 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
[NOTE: Additional material submitted for the Hearing Record is not reprinted here but is on file with the House Judiciary Committee. The material referred to is listed below.]
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP): Safe From the Start, Taking Action on Children Exposed to Violence
National Institute of Justice, National Evaluation of Weed & Seed, Cross-Site Analysis, Research Report
National Institute of Justice, Research in Brief