Katie Sepich Enhanced DNA Collection Act of 2010

Mr. President, I am pleased to join with Senators Collins, Akaka, and Voinovich today to introduce the bipartisan SECURE Facilities Act of 2010--legislation that would modernize and reform an important but often overlooked agency within the Department of Homeland Security, DHS: the Federal Protective Service, FPS.

FPS--with just 1,200 full time employees and approximately 15,000 contract guards--is responsible for security at 9,000 Federal buildings across the land. That mission, unfortunately, is in grave peril--due to severe budget shortfalls, mismanagement, and multiple operational challenges. That is why we are introducing legislation today to reform the agency, provide it with adequate resources, strengthen its management capabilities, and help it function at a higher level so it can protect visitors and employees at Federal buildings across this country more effectively.

Let me provide some background. When FPS was folded into DHS in 2003, it lost access to supplemental funding from its previous parent agency--the General Services Administration. FPS immediately ran into trouble. It had

difficulty paying its bills, budget cuts hurt employee training and other important functions, and personnel cuts negatively affected the agency's performance. All this occurred even as the agency was given more responsibilities, and the Administration was trying to downsize the FPS workforce by one-third.

To assist us in our oversight of the agency, Senators Collins, Akaka, Voinovich, and I asked the Government Accountability Office, GAO, in February 2007 to initiate a comprehensive review of the FPS. GAO reported to Congress 8 times between 2004 and 2010 on the financial and management challenges at FPS, and made 32 recommendations for improvement, some of which FPS adopted.

What did GAO find? Unfortunately, it found a seriously dysfunctional agency that lacked much, if any, focus or strategy for accomplishing its mission--where guards were caught sleeping on the job, and GAO investigators were able to successfully smuggle bomb-making ingredients past security to build an explosive device in a restroom and then stroll around the building undetected. GAO's review concluded that contract guards lacked adequate training, FPS personnel suffered from low morale, oversight of the contract guards was poor, and that many of the standards that guide Federal building security and guard behavior are outdated.

The SECURE Facilities Act of 2010 addresses these shortcomings and incorporates recommendations from GAO. For the first time, we would formally authorize the Federal Protective Service and the interagency government body responsible for establishing security standards for all Federal facilities, the Interagency Security Committee. Our legislation also addresses four major challenges.

First, the bill ensures that FPS has sufficient personnel to carry out its mission. Though the agency has assumed increased responsibilities since it joined DHS, it has done so with fewer personnel.

Second, our legislation tackles deficiencies within the contract guard program. FPS contract guards are the first line of defense at Federal facilities, so we must ensure they are held to a high standard and are prepared and equipped to face the many different kinds of threats Federal buildings are vulnerable to.

Third, the bill ensures the FPS is focused and prepared to address the threat of explosives. The 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City drew our attention to this threat, but FPS has been slow to deploy sufficient countermeasures to detect and deter this type of attack.

Fourth, our bill is mindful of the delicate balance between public access and security. We have worked to ensure that the emphasis on securing Federal facilities remains on security but we also support avenues of appeal if a building tenant believes a security countermeasure unduly hinders public access. If the Federal Protective Service is to be held accountable--by Congress, the administration, and the American people--it should no longer be forced to defend Federal agencies that choose to implement less costly and potentially less effective security countermeasures for buildings.

Our bill would provide additional funding for the agency by directing OMB to adjust the building security fees paid by other agencies to ensure adequate funding for FPS. We would provide sufficient resources so that FPS can hire 500 full time employees over the next 4 years. We would also ensure that FPS never employs fewer than 1,200 full time employees at any point--a conservative number that may well require an increase over time.

While many of those additional 500 new employees will be law enforcement officers, the legislation also provides FPS with the flexibility to hire additional administrative and support personnel, allowing it to improve its overall management, strengthen its oversight of contract guards, monitor contractor performance, and share contract assessments throughout the agency. The legislation also provides Federal law enforcement retirement benefits to FPS officers, to help the agency recruit and retain quality personnel.

The bill further would require the FPS to maintain overt and covert testing programs to assess the training of guards, the security of Federal facilities, and to establish procedures for retraining or terminating ineffective guards. The bill ensures the basic documents outlining a security guard's general and specific responsibilities, the Security Guard Information Manual, and their post orders, are up to date and periodically reviewed.

We would require DHS to establish performance-based standards for checkpoint detection technologies for explosives and other threats at Federal facilities. It would allow FPS officers to carry firearms off duty, as most other Federal law enforcement officers can, allowing them to respond to incidents more quickly. Finally, the bill includes several reporting requirements, including one on agency personnel needs, one on retention rates of contract guards, and another looking at the feasibility of federalizing the contract guard workforce.

We are deeply indebted to the excellent work of GAO which we highlighted in a July 8, 2009, Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing. At the hearing, GAO unveiled the results of its year-long investigation conducted at the Committee's request. GAO visited 6 of 11 FPS regions throughout the country and observed the guard inspection process; interviewed regional managers, inspectors, guards and contract guard managers; met with representatives from security guard companies; analyzed guard contract requirements, guard training and certification requirements, and guard instruction documents.

GAO found that the security provided at Federal buildings by FPS personnel and contract security guards fell well short of what we expect of them. Some guards lacked basic security or x-ray machine training. The FPS was hard pressed to identify which guards were qualified or effective, leading to several embarrassing incidents. One guard used a government computer to run an adult website during his shift, while another inattentive guard allowed a baby in a carrier to pass through an X-ray machine. A third guard was photographed asleep at his station.

GAO's special investigations unit conducted its own covert tests at ten high security Federal facilities in several different cities. Using readily available components to make a liquid-based improvised explosive device, they smuggled the components through security, manufactured a bomb in a public restroom, and then moved throughout the Federal building undetected. Some of the buildings tested by GAO investigators house district offices for our colleagues right here in the House and Senate. I note, however, that while the components were real, the actual explosive liquids were diluted to ensure the bomb was not functional.

Based on the Committee's and GAO's oversight work over the past several years, it is clear that Congress must move quickly to address the remaining security vulnerabilities associated with our Federal buildings.

I am confident that this comprehensive, bipartisan legislation will foster meaningful reform, modernize the Federal Protective Service, and improve the security of our Federal facilities across the country. I urge my colleagues to support the bill and I thank Senator Collins, Senator Akaka, Senator Voinovich and their hardworking staffs for all that they have done on this issue so we could introduce this bill today.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the SECURE Act of 2010--Supporting Employee Competency and Updating Readiness Enhancements. This bill would help to improve inadequate security at too many of our Federal buildings.

As a Nation, we have learned several hard truths: Terrorists are intent on attacking the United States, and their tactics continue to evolve. The early identification of a security gap can save countless lives if we act promptly to close it. There is no substitute for pre- emptive action to detect, disrupt, and defend against terrorist plots.

As we remember the lives lost when terrorists attacked the United States 9 years ago, we must avoid complacency. Our country's defenses must be nimble, multi-layered, informed by timely intelligence, and coordinated across multiple agencies.

This is difficult work, requiring painstaking attention to detail and an unwavering focus. We must remain vigilant to the threats we face. Unfortunately, the evidence indicates that there are significant security problems at Federal buildings, where thousands of employees serve thousands more of our citizens every work day.

The Federal Protective Service, FPS, is charged with securing nearly 9,000 Federal facilities and protecting the government employees who work in them, and the Americans who use them to access vital services.

But, independent investigations by the Government Accountability Office and the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General have documented serious and systemic security flaws within the operations of the FPS. These lapses place Federal employees and private citizens at risk.

In June of last year, for example, GAO's undercover investigators smuggled bomb-making materials into 10 Federal office buildings. Every single building GAO targeted was breached--a perfect record of security failure. At each facility, concealed bomb components passed through checkpoints monitored by FPS guards. Once inside, the covert GAO investigators were able to assemble the simulated explosive devices without interruption.

A July 2009 GAO report documented training flaws for FPS contract guards, some of whom failed to receive mandatory training on the operation of metal detectors and x-ray equipment. Other contract guards were deficient in key certifications such as CPR, First Aid, and firearms training. All told, GAO found that 62 percent of the FPS contract guards it reviewed lacked valid certifications in one or more of these areas.

This review also found that FPS did little to ensure compliance with rules and regulations and failed to conduct inspections of guard posts after regular business hours. When GAO investigators tested these posts, they found some guards sleeping on an overnight shift.

In another example, an inattentive guard allowed a baby in a carrier to pass through an x-ray machine on its conveyor belt. That guard was fired, but he ultimately won a lawsuit against the FPS because the agency could not document that he had received required training on the machine.

A few months earlier, in April 2009, the Department of Homeland Security's Inspector General also found critical failings in the FPS contract guard program. The Inspector General's recommendations included many concrete steps to strengthen contract guard performance, such as improving the award and management of contracts and increasing the amount of training and number of compliance inspections.

These reports demonstrate that American taxpayers are simply not receiving the security they have paid for and that they expect FPS to provide. The reports also show the vulnerabilities facing Federal employees and Federal infrastructure because of lax security.

While shining a light on these failings in multiple hearings, our Committee pressed the FPS to take action to close these security gaps. Although some tentative steps have been taken by FPS, we can no longer wait for OMB and DHS to implement the absolutely critical security measures necessary to help protect our Federal buildings, our Federal employees, and the American public.

The legislation that I introduce today, with Senators Lieberman, Akaka, and Voinovich, would help close these security gaps at our Federal buildings.

First, the bill would mandate the Interagency Security Committee, which was established by Executive Order 6 months after the Oklahoma City bombing, to increase security standards at Federal facilities. The ISC, comprised of representatives from agencies across the government, would establish risk-based performance standards for the security of federal buildings. FPS would then enforce these requirements based on the risk tier assigned the facility by the ISC.

Prior reports clearly demonstrate that FPS lacks authority to require tenant agencies of a Federal facility to comply with recommended security countermeasures.

For example, although FPS may ask tenant agencies to purchase or repair security equipment like cameras and x-ray machines, based on the ISC's recommended security countermeasures, these tenant agencies can refuse to purchase or repair the equipment based on cost.

Since FPS has no enforcement mechanism, these machines are not upgraded, or remain inoperable, and security suffers. With so much at stake, tenant agencies should not be able to effectively overrule the security experts on the ISC and at FPS.

To address this problem, our legislation would provide FPS the authority needed to mandate the implementation of security measures at a facility. FPS also would have the authority to inspect federal facilities to enforce compliance.

The bill would allow the FPS Director to charge additional fees if tenant agencies fail to comply with applicable security standards. In such cases, the Secretary also must notify Congress of the non- compliant facilities.

Our bill also would require an independent analysis of FPS's long- term staffing needs.

The Government has an obligation to protect our Nation's security, and our Federal buildings are targets for violence. This legislation would provide FPS with stronger authority to improve security at our Federal buildings. The American public that relies on these facilities and the Federal employees who work in them deserve better and more reliable protection.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that is very near to my heart, a bill to provide a lasting permanent tribute to former Alaska U.S. Senator Ted Stevens, who died Aug. 9th in a plane crash in southwest Alaska during a fishing trip. The bill actually calls for creation of two permanent tributes to the Senator, the naming of Alaska's currently highest unnamed mountain peak in honor of the Senator, calling the 13,895-foot peak in southern Denali National Park, Mount Stevens, and the naming of part of the State's largest ice field in the Chugach Mountains as the Ted Stevens Icefield.

Ted Stevens, a colleague of most of us in this body, and a lawmaker that I interned for more than 30 years ago, truly was Alaska. He was the State's senator for all but 11 years of its current existence as a State. During his more than 40 years in the Senate he played a significant role in the transformation of Alaska from an impoverished territory to a full-fledged State. Senator Stevens, a pilot during World War II, came to Alaska as a U.S. Attorney in the then territory of Alaska in 1956. He later served in the Eisenhower Administration where he was a leading force in writing the legislation that led to the admission of Alaska as the 49th State in the Union on Jan. 3, 1959.

In 1961, he moved back from Washington, D.C. to Alaska where he was elected to the Alaska House of Representatives just after the state's great earthquake in 1964. He was subsequently elected as Speaker pro tempore and majority leader until his appointment to the U.S. Senate on Christmas Eve of 1968 upon the death of one of the State's two original senators, E.L. ``Bob'' Bartlett. He was elected in his own right 7 times over the next 40 years, becoming the longest-serving Republican Senator in U.S. history. Stevens was third in line for the Presidency from 2003 through 2007.

While he is remembered by all in Alaska for his tireless efforts to win Federal support to develop the young State's largely 19th Century frontier infrastructure, he did so much more for all Alaskans. He worked tirelessly to enact the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act that settled aboriginal land claims and gave Alaska Natives the right to select about 44 million acres of Alaska's 365-million acres to protect their long-term economic, cultural and political future.

Ted helped the State develop an economy by authoring the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act, which permitted oil to flow to market from the State's North Slope. He authored the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and the High Seas Driftnet Fisheries Enforcement Act that ended the foreign domination of fishing fleets in Alaskan and American waters, allowing the State's commercial fishing industry to rebound. He was a leader in telecommunication policies, leading efforts to pass the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that paved the way to an era of digital television and communications in this country and also launched telemedicine and distance learning. And he attempted to make the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act as workable as possible for the State, while protecting more than 100 million acres of Alaska in parks and refuges--the largest single conservation bill in the Nation's history.

Ted was a committed sportsman, who loved outdoor pursuits such as fishing and hunting, and also amateur sports, authoring the Ted Stevens Amateur and Olympic Sports Act, Title IX amendments to encourage women's sports, and the Carol M. White Physical Education Program that did so much to improve physical education in schools and colleges nationwide. He also became a true expert on defense issues, providing unconditional support to the Armed Forces of the United States in his role as chairman and ranking member of the Subcommittee on Defense Appropriations for more than two decades.

Ted Stevens truly was a mountain of a man in policy development for the State of Alaska and thus it is a pleasure to seek to name both a mountain and an ice field in his honor. The peak proposed for naming is the peak referred to as South Hunter peak in the climbing community. It is located on the southern side of Denali National Park. At 13,895 feet it is the largest peak still unnamed in the State and also a peak visible on a clear day from the Parks Highway, the main north-south road for travelers between Fairbanks and Anchorage, two cities in Alaska that Ted is most associated with helping develop.

The ice field in the uplands of the Chugach Mountains is the base for the Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Matanuska, Nelchina, Tazlina, Valdez and Shoup Glaciers--the Harvard being particularly appropriate to be associated with a man who graduated from Harvard Law School in 1950. The entire Chugach Icefield, at 8,340 square miles, the largest in Alaska, will provide a fitting tribute for a senator whose breadth of knowledge covered all of Alaska's 586,000 square miles and whose love of the State and its residents was even larger.

This bill follows proper procedure by directing the U.S. Geographical Place Names Board to name the peak and ice field for the State's former senior senator, it not being done directly by Congress. But to guarantee timely action, it requires the board to act within 30 days of the bill's enactment.

While there are a number of facilities in Alaska that bear the name of Senator Stevens, this bill will guarantee that future generations of Alaskans will remember him when they engage in the outdoor pursuits that all Alaskans love, from mountain climbing to fishing in the waters of Prince William Sound and the rivers of South central Alaska, all fueled by the meltwater from the huge ice field that dominates the South central landscape.

This is a fitting tribute for a mentor and friend, to whom Alaskans owe so much. I hope for quick passage of this act by this Congress to provide another lasting legacy for Senator Ted Stevens.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Katie Sepich Enhanced DNA Collection Act of 2010. I am pleased that Senators Udall of New Mexico, Schumer, and Bennet of Colorado, are joining me today in sponsoring this important piece of legislation.

Similar legislation, which was championed in the House of Representatives by Congressman Teague, overwhelmingly passed that body with a bipartisan vote of 357 to 32. The bill is named after Katie Sepich, a promising graduate student attending New Mexico State University who was tragically murdered in 2003.

The man who killed Katie was arrested for aggravated assault about three months after the murder. Although police had collected the killer's DNA from the crime scene, because there was no requirement that DNA be taken from individuals arrested for serious felonies, police weren't able to get a match until about three years after the murder when the man was sent to prison after being convicted of unrelated crimes.

If New Mexico had the arrestee law then that it has today it would have taken three months, not three years, to solve the crime. Katie's mother, Jayann, has worked tirelessly at the state and Federal level to give law enforcement the tools they need to promptly solve crimes and ensure that other mothers don't have to suffer the same horrible ordeal that her family has. I commend Congressman Teague for taking up this cause in the House, and I look forward to helping with this effort in the Senate.

We can't get Katie back, or the other lives that have been lost to these senseless crimes, but we can do something to help solve cases and prevent similar crimes from occurring in the future. One such step is to enhance the capacity of states to collect the DNA of individuals arrested for certain felony crimes, which would substantially increase the ability of law enforcement to match DNA found at crimes scenes with that of suspects and individuals who have been previously arrested, charged, or convicted of crimes.

The Federal Government and about half the states, including New Mexico, currently collect arrestee DNA for serious offenses. This has proven to be a very effective tool in solving cases, and it makes sense to incentivize states to continue and to expand this effort. Since New Mexico implemented ``Katie's Law'' in 2007, there have been about 100 matches of arrestees. It is also important to note that DNA collection has not only demonstrated its effectiveness in terms of saving lives and preventing crimes, but it has also proved to be an important means of ensuring that innocent individuals are not mistakenly jailed for crimes they did not commit.

Let me take a moment to specifically describe what this legislation would, and would not, do. First, this legislation is aimed at creating an incentive for states to enact arrestee DNA collection programs. It is not a mandate. States that meet minimum collection guidelines could apply for DOJ grant assistance in covering the first-year costs that they have incurred or will incur in implementing the standards. If they enact laws in accordance with the enhanced guidelines, States would be eligible for an additional bonus payment.

Second, the bill encourages DNA testing for serious felonies, such as murder, sex crimes, aggravated assault, and burglary. It is narrowly tailored to apply to the most serious crimes. Third, the legislation provides that all of the expungement provisions under federal law are applicable. Arrestees who have their DNA included in the federal database may have their records expunged if their conviction is overturned, they are acquitted, or charges are dismissed or not filed within the applicable time period. Furthermore, the bill provides that as a condition of receiving a grant states must notify individuals who submit samples of the relevant expungement procedures and post the information on a public Web site.

Lastly, I would like to address the concerns some have raised about the constitutionality of collecting arrestee DNA. Although courts have upheld the collection of arrestee DNA, I recognize that the question of whether the collection of a DNA sample from an arrestee is consistent with the Fourth Amendment isn't a completely settled question of law. Some courts have viewed the collection as something akin to fingerprinting and other courts have viewed it as a more intrusive search, such as the taking of a blood sample. However, the Department of Justice has stated that it believes that this legislation is constitutional and is supportive of encouraging states to pass DNA arrestee laws. I believe that such programs, with appropriate safeguards in place, have demonstrated that they can be a very effective mechanism to save lives, solve crimes, and prevent wrongful convictions.

For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. President, few things are more important to the future of the American economy and job creation than protecting our intellectual property. The Chamber of Commerce estimates that American intellectual property accounts for more than $5 trillion of the country's gross domestic product, and IP-intensive industries employ more than 18 million workers. Each year, online piracy and the sale of counterfeit goods cost American businesses billions of dollars, and result in hundreds of thousands of lost jobs. Studies recently cited by the AFL-CIO estimate that digital theft of movies and music alone costs more than 200,000 jobs. This is unacceptable in any economic climate. It is devastating today.

The severity of the problem continues to increase and businesses of all types and sizes--and their employees--are the victims. In Vermont, companies like Burton Snowboards and the Vermont Teddy Bear Company are well recognized brands that depend on the enforcement of our intellectual property laws to keep their businesses thriving.

The growth of the digital marketplace is extraordinary and it gives creators and producers new opportunities to reach consumers. But it also brings with it the perils of piracy and counterfeiting. The increased usage and accessibility of the Internet has transformed it into the new Main Street. Internet purchases have become so commonplace that consumers are less wary of online shopping and therefore more easily victimized by online products that may have health, safety or other quality concerns when they are counterfeit.

Today, I am introducing the bipartisan Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act, which will provide the Justice Department with an important tool to crack down on Web sites dedicated to online infringement.

This legislation will protect the investment American companies make in developing brands and creating content and will protect the jobs associated with those investments. Protecting intellectual property is not uniquely a Democratic or Republican priority--it is a bipartisan priority.

The Justice Department is currently limited in the remedies available to prevent Web sites dedicated to offering infringing content. These Web sites are often based overseas yet target American consumers. American consumers are too often deceived into thinking the products they are purchasing are legitimate because the Web sites reside at familiar-sounding domain names and are complete with corporate advertising, credit card acceptance, and advertising links that make them appear legitimate.

The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act will give the Department of Justice an expedited process for cracking down on these rogue Web sites, regardless of whether the Web site's owner is located inside or outside of the United States. This legislation authorizes the Justice Department to file an in rem civil action against the domain name, and to seek an order from the court that the domain name is used to access a Web site that is dedicated to infringing activities. Once the court issues an order against the domain name, the Attorney General would have the authority to serve the domain name's U.S. based registry or registrar with that order, which would then be required to suspend the infringing domain name.

Where the registry or registrar is not located in the United States, the Act would provide the Attorney General the authority to serve the order on other specified third parties at its discretion, including Internet service providers, payment processors, and online ad network providers. These third parties, which are critical to the financial viability of the infringing Web site's business, would then be required to stop doing business with that Web site by, for example, blocking online access to the rogue site or not processing the Web site's purchases.

This legislation will provide the Department of Justice with an important tool to protect American consumers, American businesses, and American jobs. We should not expect that enactment of the legislation will completely solve the problem of online infringement, but it will make it more difficult for foreign entities to profit off American hard work and ingenuity. This bill targets the most egregious actors, and is an important first step to putting a stop to online piracy and sale of counterfeit goods.

I look forward to working with all Senators to pass this important, bipartisan legislation.

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