Terrorist Penalties Enhancement Act of 2003

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that would authorize the construction of new veterans' hospitals in east- central Florida and Las Vegas, NV. In addition, the legislation would enable the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA, Medical Center in San Juan, Puerto Rico, to sustain operations in the event of a natural disaster, such as an earthquake.

For years now, VA has been under a sort of moratorium for new construction projects. This was due to the capital asset realignment for enhanced services, CARES, process, which is designed to examine VA's infrastructure and try to realign it to better meet the projected needs of veterans. Many here in Congress were understandably reluctant to invest any valuable dollars in a facility that may ultimately be slated for downsizing.

However, the CARES process is now nearing its end. The CARES Commission is in the process of reviewing the national draft plan developed by the Under Secretary for Health, and Commissioners will make their recommendations to the Secretary by the end of November. The Secretary will then make his final decisions on what plans will be implemented by the end of the year.

Included in the national draft plan were two major construction initiatives: a new hospital and clinic in Las Vegas, NV, and a new facility in east-central Florida. In light of the fact that these two projects are the only new hospitals included in the draft plan, and that the great need in both of these areas has been well documented, the sooner we can get these facilities up and running, the better.

Veterans living in east-central Florida are in dire need of a full- fledged VA hospital. One VA report found that since 1996, ``the Central Florida market sustained the greatest workload expansion of the entire VA system--105 percent.'' Other VA studies have deemed Orlando as ``the logical choice for infrastructure investment for all major Inpatient and Outpatient categories.'' The decision about where to place a new VA hospital in this region falls to VA, but I encourage Secretary Principi to carefully study all the options to ensure that the most appropriate location is chosen.

Las Vegas, in Clark County, NV, was recognized by VA as, `` . . . one of the fastest growing markets in the U.S.'' VA also acknowledges that there is a gap in long-term care accessibility in this area, and that contracting in the community is not a viable option as there are quality of care issues with the region's private sector facilities. Why should we wait to authorize projects whose necessity is broadly recognized by veterans and VA alike?

This legislation would also authorize $30 million for the San Juan VA Medical Center to undertake much needed upgrading in order to ensure that patient safety is not unnecessarily jeopardized in the event of an earthquake. The money would be used to bring the facility in line with the CD-54 natural disasters directive, enabling vital services to continue to be provided for 7 to 10 days after a disaster. Services that would be reinforced by this project are primarily utilities, which in some cases provide lifesaving support to patients.

In 1991, the San Juan VA Medical Center was deemed seismically unsound, and other structural deficiencies were uncovered as well. Although the Carribean is not normally thought of as a seismic ``hot spot,'' the islands are mountainous and severe earthquakes do occur there every few decades. The supposed unlikelihood of such an event is no reason to not have contingency operations should something actually occur. Patient safety is not something that can be gambled with in this manner. It is important that we supply the San Juan VA Medical Center with the additional resources it needs to make sure that no patient has to go without life support in the event of a natural disaster. I was disappointed that the San Juan upgrading project was not included in VA's draft plan, but regardless, I do believe we have an obligation to make these needed repairs.

Finally, I would like to recognize the efforts of my friend Senator Reid in this initiative, who is also facing a rapidly growing veteran population in his home State of Nevada. Additionally, I want to thank Representative Corrine Brown of the Orlando area, Representative Shelley Berkley of Las Vegas, and Representative Anibal Acevedo-Vila of Puerto Rico, who have all been very helpful in developing a companion bill in the House.

I urge my colleagues to join us in this effort for our Nation's veterans.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``Pretrial Detention and Lifetime Supervision of Terrorists Act of 2003,'' legislation that will fill continuing gaps in the laws that our police and prosecutors use to protect our Nation from terrorism.

Under current Federal law, defendants accused of certain crimes--such as drug crimes carrying a potential sentence of ten years or more--are presumptively denied pretrial release. This provision of current law, however, does not apply to terrorists.

The legislation that I have introduced today would fix this oversight, by amending the criminal code to presumptively deny pre- trial release to persons charged with terrorist activity. The presumption would apply to Federal crimes of terrorism, as enumerated in the criminal code, if the Attorney General certifies that the offense, by its nature and context, appears to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping, or an offense involved in or related to domestic or international terrorism.

Extending the presumption in current law to terrorist offenses is justified by the unparalleled magnitude of the threat posed to our Nation by acts of terrorism. Terrorists are at least as much of a threat as drug dealers--and should also be subject to a presumption of pre-trial detention.

The bill that I have introduced today also would broaden the list of offenses that render a convicted terrorist eligible for lifetime supervision subsequent to his release from prison. Currently law allows lifetime post-release supervision for terrorist offenses only if they result in or create a foreseeable risk of death or serious injury. This limitation could prevent the imposition of adequate supervision periods for persons convicted of non-violent terrorist offenses, such as a computer attack on the United States that results in tens of billions of dollars of economic damage. It could also limit supervision for persons who provide the essential financial or other material support for terrorist acts, but who do not themselves directly engage in violent terrorist acts.

The continuing danger posed to our Nation's security by such persons may be no less than that posed by the direct perpetrators of terrorist violence. The courts should be afforded the same degree of discretion in prescribing postrelease supervision for these terrorists as for others.

For this reason, the bill introduced today eliminates the foreseeable-risk-of-injury requirement and allows lifetime supervision for all offenses in the standard list of crimes likely to be committed by terrorists and their supporters. This reform reflects the continuing danger posed by convicted terrorists after their completion of a term of imprisonment. It recognizes that even those terrorists not directly involved in the use of violence may continue to harbor a commitment to terrorist goals and methods that will not dissipate within a few years of release.

I look forward to the Senate's consideration of these common-sense reforms to our Nation's anti-terror laws.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I join with my colleague, Senator Graham of Florida, to introduce legislation that authorizes funding for a new veterans' hospital, outpatient clinic and senior center in Southern Nevada. Nevada is now the third most popular retirement State in the Nation. And many of the retirees who make their homes in Nevada are veterans who served our country with courage and honor.

More than 240,000 veterans live in Nevada, and more than one-third of Nevada's residents over age 65 have worn the uniform of the United States. Veterans are the cornerstone of our economy. They are also our neighbors, our family members and our friends.

As we welcome these veterans, we must also ensure that they can get the services they need--especially medical care. Our veterans put their lives on the line for our freedom. They deserve the best health care in the world. But we have been struggling to keep up with our fast-growing population of veterans.

Across the Nation, more than 110,000 veterans have waited more than 6 months for their first medical appointment with the VA. There have been some backlogs in booming areas like Las Vegas, which has the highest growth rate in the Nation. This new facility should ease some of these delays and result in improved care for our veterans.

I was pleased to learn recently from VA Secretary Anthony Principi that he endorsed the building of a new hospital in southern Nevada. This bill, which was made possible by the strong leadership of Senator Graham of Florida, would authorize $250 million to build this sorely needed facility.

I realize that we have many urgent priorities today, and our resources are not unlimited. But this is a matter of national security. We have soldiers in

the desert of Iraq today who volunteered to risk their lives protecting our freedom. They willingly put their lives on the line for us. In return, we make certain promises to them. One of those promises is that they will receive quality health care when they come home. We must keep this promise to our troops.

Right now, I am sorry to say, we are not keeping that promise to the Nation's veterans. This bill will help steer us onto the right course, and begin to correct that injustice for the veterans in Southern Nevada.

I urge your support of this legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.