Volume 161, No. 6 covering the 1st Session of the 114th Congress (2015 - 2016) was published by the Congressional Record.
The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS” mentioning the Environmental Protection Agency was published in the Senate section on pages S202-S209 on Jan. 13, 2015.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. ISAKSON (for himself, Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. Alexander, Ms.
Ayotte, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Crapo, Ms. Collins, Mr. Enzi, Mrs.
Fischer, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Heinrich, Mr. Kaine, Mr. King, Ms.
Klobuchar, Mr. Lankford, Mr. Manchin, Mr. McCain, Ms.
Murkowski, Mr. Perdue, Mr. Portman, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Warner, Mr.
Johnson, and Ms. Heitkamp):
S. 150. A bill to provide for a biennial budget process and a biennial appropriations process and to enhance oversight and the performance of the Federal Government; to the Committee on the Budget.
Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I am very pleased to announce today that the biennial budget proposal introduced by Senators Isakson and Shaheen has been dropped. There are 21 cosponsors, 15 Republicans, 6 Democrats, and 1 Independent, and the number is growing as we speak.
Senator Shaheen and I started this initiative 2 years ago and it received 68 votes and a test vote on the budget in 2013. We believe it will receive the necessary votes to become the law of the land in the United States of America.
You might ask why a biennial budget or you might ask yourself why an
$18 trillion debt and why hundreds of billions of dollars in deficit. We don't have the oversight necessary with the spending that we do now to keep us from wasting money. It is time we ran our country like we run our home. It is time we held our agencies accountable. It is time our appropriations weren't just idle promises but our oversight was the rule of law in the United States Senate.
Twenty States out of fifty in the United States have biennial budgets. Countries around the world have biennial budgets. This Congress 3 years ago did a biennial budget for the Veterans' Administration just to ensure we wouldn't have a break in funding if the government shut down. Predictability of funding of government is critical, but the oversight of that funding is more critical.
Picture this. You get elected in an even-numbered year, 2014. Your first order of business in 2015 is to pass a 2-year appropriations act and a 2-year budget. But then in the even-numbered year that comes up when you are running for reelection, your job is not spending, your job is oversight. Wouldn't it be nice, instead of going home and promising you are bringing home the bacon, instead you are bringing home the savings to see to it that taxpayers' money is better spent?
The biennial budget is an idea whose time has come. It is the only way we are going to measurably and sustainably reduce the deficits and reduce the debt in the United States of America and hold our spending more accountable.
Just last night on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, the Clay bill was passed on suicide prevention, a new program in the VA, and the funding mechanism was existing funds and fungibility. We already know there is existing money in the appropriations to our agencies to pay for new ideas if we charge them to go find them. Some of the measures we have been funding for 40 or 50 years probably don't need to be done anymore and some of the things we are not doing probably need to be done. But the way to do it is not to spend more money and throw more money at the problem, but the way to do it is to do it the way the American taxpayers do it back home--sit around the kitchen table, set their priorities, make their funding predictable, and from time to time go back and look at where they are spending money and see if they can't improve it. This is an idea that will make America great.
Senator Shaheen is a former Governor of the State of New Hampshire. She had a biennial budget process in her State, and I wish to yield to her to describe her cosponsorship of this bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
Mrs. SHAHEEN. I thank the Presiding Officer and I thank my colleague Senator Isakson, and I am pleased to join him on the floor today as we reintroduce this bipartisan legislation, the Biennial Budgeting and Appropriations Act. I want to start by recognizing the good work of Senator Isakson because he started working on this issue when he came to the Senate in 2005, and he has introduced this legislation in every Congress since then. I have been pleased to be able to join him in the last two Congresses.
I think we have an opportunity in this Congress to pass this commonsense bipartisan reform. As Senator Isakson pointed out, there is no question that the budget process in Washington is broken. Since 1980 there have been only two budgets that have been finished on time, according to the process. In that timeframe Congress has resorted to more than 150 short-term funding bills or continuing resolutions, and we all remember what it was like when the government shut down in October of 2013. It cost the economy $24 billion. It hurt small business. It hurt people across this country. That is no way to govern.
While we have made significant progress to reduce deficits in recent years, we need a new way to do business in Washington. Biennial budgeting won't fix everything, but as Senator Isakson said, it is an important reform that will allow us to work across the aisle not only to make more sense of the budget process but to be better stewards of taxpayer dollars.
We know that biennial budgeting works. I can attest to that personally, coming from the State of New Hampshire where we have a biennial budget. I served three terms as Governor. We were able in each of those bienniums to pass a budget that was balanced, that allowed us to get the budget done in the first year of the election cycle and in the second year to be able to have oversight. It works in New Hampshire, it works in 20 States around the country, and it can work in Washington.
Biennial budgeting offers a better process that encourages us to work together to pass budgets on time and to use taxpayer dollars more efficiently. As Senator Isakson says, in the first year congressional agencies would put together a 2-year budget. In the second year Congress would have time to conduct oversight to give agencies the ability to focus on achieving their missions.
As we all know, there are regular reports from the Government Accountability Office, GAO, that identify areas of waste, fraud, and duplicative programs within government.
For example, they have identified ways to reform the farm programs, to cut down on inefficiencies in defense, to reduce fraud in health programs, but the current budget process doesn't provide an effective mechanism to regularly review GAO's recommendations.
Under my annual budgeting, we would be able to take a close look at those recommendations to implement savings in the second year which will allow us to figure out how we can more effectively provide programs to the American people and eliminate those that don't work and support those that do.
As we said, in 2013 we had a very strong vote with 68 Senators voting to endorse the concept of biannual budgeting. It was a very strong bipartisan vote. A similar biannual budget bill passed the House last year with a bipartisan bill vote. It is clear the momentum is growing for this concept because people understand we have to do something to reform our budget process.
The bill we are introducing today has 22 bipartisan cosponsors. I know we are both working to get more bipartisan sponsors on the bill, and we think we have a great shot, with support from this body, to pass biannual budgeting. We think there is support in the House to do that, and I look forward to working with Senator Isakson and my colleagues in the Senate to get this done.
Mr. ISAKSON. I thank the Senator for her support, and I urge the other Members of the Senate to join us in this reform effort for the spending of the taxpayer's dollars.
______
By Mr. ROBERTS (for himself, Ms. Ayotte, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Blunt,
Mr. Coats, Mr. Crapo, Mrs. Fischer, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Hatch,
Mr. Isakson, Mr. Johnson, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Rubio, Mr.
Sessions, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Tillis, and Mr. Toomey):
S. 168. A bill to codify and modify regulatory requirements of Federal agencies; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Mr. ROBERTS. I rise today to talk about a problem that affects virtually every American, and that would be government regulations; to be more accurate, government overregulation.
Let me point out something. In 2014, the administration issued 3,541 rules in 1 year. That cost $181 billion. The first week of this new year brought us 35 new rules which added another 1,326 pages to the Federal Register. I would urge people back home in the business community or any other endeavor in which they are bothered by regulations to read the Federal Register as opposed to the Congressional Record. The Congressional Record deals with natural gas. The Federal Register deals with facts and regulations.
Yet just last night we learned that President Obama has threatened to veto a significant regulatory reform proposal now being considered by the House of Representatives. It is interesting to me that the President is now threatening to veto his own ideas. Back in January of 2011, President Obama issued an Executive Order. It was entitled
``Improve Regulation and Regulatory Review.'' That is in quotes. Unfortunately, despite claims otherwise, the Executive order has largely been ignored.
My bill takes this order and gives it the force of law. My bill would require that all regulations put forth by the current and future administrations consider the economic burden on American businesses and ensure stakeholder input during the regulatory process, thus promoting innovation and new jobs.
Just as the President said in his order, this egregious assault on our economy must stop; it must end.
Like many of my colleagues, I have had a longstanding concern with the regulatory process. Like other States, from every corner of Kansas, the No. 1 topic of concern for all businesses, including agriculture, energy, small shops on Main Street, healthcare, education, lending--
virtually every enterprise is harmed by overly burdensome and costly regulations. Whether it is the EPA'S Waters of the United States proposed rule or listing of the infamous lesser prairie chicken as an endangered species, the public is losing faith in our government.
Obamacare is a prime example of this administration's vast regulatory overreach. The bill, as signed into law by the President, as most of us know, was no short read. It was over 2,000 pages. But as the rollout continues, the administration has now expanded Obamacare into over 24,000 pages of regulations in the Federal Register.
Here is one example of the overly intrusive regulations this administration used the Affordable Health Care Act to implement. It is Health and Human Services' mandate requiring religious institutions to provide insurance coverage for contraceptives and emergency contraceptives.
Last year the U.S. Supreme Court had to intervene and determine that the HHS mandate placed an excessive burden on the religious freedom of owners of family business.
Regrettably, costly and intrusive regulations are not limited to HHS and Obamacare and CMS and all of those regulations. Not to be outdone by HHS, the Environmental Protection Agency has its own set of overly burdensome regulations.
Let's take the proposed Waters of the United States rule. For example, as the distinguished Senator from Arkansas knows, this proposal has caused a firestorm of opposition all throughout farm country. The EPA claims that the proposed Waters of the United States rule simply clarifies their scope of jurisdiction.
Well, therein lies the problem.
Farmers and ranchers do not believe it. I don't believe it. They fear the rule would allow the EPA to further expand its control of private property under the guise of the Clean Water Act.
If finalized, this rule could have the EPA requiring a permit for ordinary field work, construction of a fence, or even planting crops near certain waters.
Kansans are justifiably worried the permits would be time consuming, costly, and that the EPA could ultimate deny the permits, even for longstanding and normal cropping practices.
This is another prime example of why many Kansans feel their way of life is under attack by the Federal Government's overreach and overregulation. Simply put, they feel ruled, not governed.
Let's not forget the burdensome carbon regulations now being proposed by the EPA. Over the last 6 years, this administration's EPA has pursued an agenda that can only be described as a war on fossil fuels and coal.
Just last week, in fact, the EPA announced that by June of this year it would finalize carbon reduction rules for both new and existing powerplants. That is going to be a move that will drive up the energy cost for all Kansans, all Americans, hoping to heat their homes during extremely cold winters or hot summers such as the ones we are experiencing now.
This decision, which the EPA itself admitted would do nothing to reduce global temperature if similar plans are not adopted by Russia, China, India and Brazil, will have unbelievable costs. According to a recent study about the American Action Forum which cites the administration's own estimates these rules are anticipated to cost industry $8.8 billion to comply. That translates into a 6-percent rise in electricity prices. Sadly, these regulations will hurt low-income individuals the most--folks who can least afford it and who spend a greater percentage of their income to heat their homes and feed their families.
Now let's look at what the Department of Labor is trying to do with President Obama's pen-and-paper dictates. Currently the Department of Labor has a regulation to eliminate the companion care exemption put forth by this body 40 years ago. This important exemption allows seniors and the disabled community access to affordable in-home care. If eliminated, those who need in-home care the most, and their families, would be forced to determine which hours are the most crucial in the day they receive assistance. In addition, caregivers who currently work over 40 hours would see their hours and paychecks cut because of this rule.
As the Department of Labor issued this rule and geared up for implementation on January 1 of this year, benefit recipients, individual States, and Members of this Chamber stood together to shine a light on the negative effects this would have on communities all across the Nation.
At the same time, a judge issued a partial determination on this regulation, and he stated the following:
The fact that the Department issued its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking after all six of these bills failed to move is nothing short of yet another thinly-veiled effort to do through regulation what could not be done through legislation. Such conduct bespeaks an arrogance to not only disregard Congress's intent but seize unprecedented authority to impose overtime and minimum wage requirements in defiance of the plain language of Section 213. It cannot stand.
My legislation addresses these abuses. Far too often the good intentions of regulations lead to job loss and red-tape that strangles business. Worse still, the agenda of bureaucrats drives bad policies and stifles economy.
I have a solution. My comprehensive bill requires agencies to promote economic growth and job creation by ensuring the benefits outweigh the cost of regulations. It is as simple as that.
We need to be listening to the folks as well who have to live with and pay for the effects of these rules. I am hearing from stakeholders that they are weighing the time and expense of responding to regulations against the fact that this administration keeps giving them the minimum allowable time and then doesn't even consider their input. Bottom line, fewer Americans are bothering to participate in the comment period process.
Stakeholder input is crucial and needs to be considered. Right now, time varies on how long the comment period stays open. Sometimes it is as little as 2 weeks. My bill would ensure the period stay open for at least 60 days. My colleagues, as we all well know, sometimes the people who are most affected by these rules don't even know they are subject to the changes.
My bill would mandate that agencies provide warnings, appropriate default rules, and disclosure requirements to the public. Right now, just the opposite takes place. The administration skirts stakeholder input by issuing interim final rules--called IFRs--and they become effective immediately upon publication. My bill allows delay of implementation if that rule is challenged in court and until the court makes a decision. All too often new regulations are proposed and finalized while existing regulations are not being enforced.
I have heard from a lot of folks in Kansas that the problems these new regulations claim to fix could be solved if the current regulations were properly monitored. Simply put, the solution is not more rules and regulations; it is considering the existing ones.
My bill mandates an ongoing review of regulatory actions to identify those outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome rules--or, as the President himself once put it, ``rules that are just plain dumb''--and allows agencies to streamline, expand, or repeal those regulations.
We need regulatory reform. My bill codifies the President's Executive order while closing the loopholes and gives it the rule of law. I do not know how the President could disagree with that.
The U.S. Chamber, the National Federation of Independent Business, the Farm Bureau, and the Competitive Enterprise Institute have all endorsed my bill.
Last year I had 35 cosponsors. We have about thirteen. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and stay engaged as this process continues.
______
By Mr. LEAHY:
S. 169. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to disallow any deduction for punitive damages, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation that will close a tax loophole that allows companies to write off the punishment they receive for corporate wrongdoing. Under current law, a corporation or individual business owner may deduct the cost of court-
ordered punitive damages paid to victims as an ``ordinary'' business expense. For the victims of extreme corporate misconduct, there is nothing ordinary about this. It is simply wrong. This tax loophole allows corporations to wreak havoc and then write it off as a cost of doing business. That undermines the whole point of punitive damages.
Punitive damage awards are designed to punish the wrongdoers and to correct dangerous or unfair practices. These awards are reserved for the most extreme and harmful misconduct. Sadly, our country's history is replete with examples of serious corporate misconduct that resulted in injury and death to American citizens, but through our civil justice system and the thoughtful deliberations of our Nations' juries, this misconduct is not only punishable by assessing punitive damages, it has led to broad changes to improve the safety and security of American consumers. Unfortunately, our current tax laws shield the worst corporate misconduct. The No Tax Write-Offs for Corporate Wrongdoers Act would change that by making a simple fix to our tax code.
In 2010, the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig exploded and 11 Americans were killed in the worst oil spill in American history. That same year, an explosion in the Upper Big Branch Mine in West Virginia claimed the lives of 29 miners. In 2009 and 2010, Toyota recalled more than 10 million vehicles because of a faulty acceleration system that has been linked to at least 31 accidents and 12 deaths, and recently admitted to misleading the public about these dangers. Let us also not forget Exxon's misconduct in 1989, which led to an ecological and human disaster that affects Alaskans even today. Vermonters and all Americans deserve to have companies such as these held accountable for their actions. Why should hard-working taxpayers subsidize corporations who deserve to be punished?
In 1994, a jury awarded $5 billion in punitive damages against Exxon for its actions which caused the Valdez spill that devastated an entire region, the livelihoods of its people, and destroyed a way of life. The role of the jury is enshrined in our Constitution, and nothing is more fundamental to the American justice system than our trust in the judgment of those who serve on them. Rather than accept this reality, Exxon paid its cadre of lawyers to fight the jury's measure of accountability all the way to the Supreme Court. In 2008, after 14 years of appeals, an activist majority on the Court invented a novel rule and held that in maritime cases, punitive damage awards could not exceed twice the amount of compensatory damages, reducing Exxon's punitive damages to $500 million. Adding insult to injury to the victims of the oil spill, Exxon was then able to use the federal tax code to write-off the punitive damages as an ``ordinary'' business expense. This is not how the system should work and it is long past time for Congress to fix it.
I have previously supported legislation by Senator Whitehouse to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in Exxon, and I am disappointed that not a single Republican joined this commonsense effort. If we cannot get bipartisan support to ensure corporations pay the highest possible price for actions that cause serious harm to health and public safety, I hope we can at least agree that American taxpayers should not have to subsidize their misconduct once a jury has determined they should be punished.
The Obama administration requested eliminating this tax deduction in its 2014 budget proposal. The Joint Committee on Taxation has estimated that ending this deduction loophole will result in increased revenues of $355 million over 10 years. Members who have devoted so much of their focus to reducing the Federal deficit should support my legislation. Anyone who cares about protecting consumers should agree that extreme corporate misconduct should not be treated in our tax code simply as a cost of doing business.
Right now, the new Republican majority in Congress is pushing legislation to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline. Despite being billed as the safest pipeline in history, the existing Keystone pipeline has spilled 12 times in its first year of operation. This has a familiar ring: Before the Valdez spill in Alaska, Exxon executives told us their oil tankers were safe. I do not support Congress bypassing the environmental appeal process to fast-track further construction of the Keystone pipeline, which poses considerable safety and environmental risks. But anyone who does want this pipeline should at a minimum consider the communities and families who would be affected by its construction, and in the event of a spill, they should make sure taxpayers are not subsidizing the damage. This speaks to our basic notions of justice and fair play.
I hope all Senators will join me to end tax write-offs for corporate wrongdoers. When companies can write off a significant portion of the financial impact of punitive damages, the incentives in our justice system that promote responsible business practices lose their force. Corporate misconduct should no longer be treated as a cost of doing business.
______
By Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Kirk,
Mr. Hatch, Mr. Graham, Mr. Coons, Mr. Udall, Mr. Coats, Mr.
Crapo, Mr. Hoeven, Mr. Casey, and Mrs. Feinstein):
S. 178. A bill to provide justice for the victims of trafficking; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 178
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Domestic trafficking victims' fund.
Sec. 3. Official recognition of American victims of human trafficking.
Sec. 4. Victim-centered child human trafficking deterrence block grant program.
Sec. 5. Direct services for victims of child pornography.
Sec. 6. Increasing compensation and restitution for trafficking victims.
Sec. 7. Streamlining human trafficking investigations.
Sec. 8. Enhancing human trafficking reporting.
Sec. 9. Reducing demand for sex trafficking.
Sec. 10. Using existing task forces and components to target offenders who exploit children.
Sec. 11. Targeting child predators.
Sec. 12. Monitoring all human traffickers as violent criminals.
Sec. 13. Crime victims' rights.
Sec. 14. Combat Human Trafficking Act.
Sec. 15. Grant accountability.
SEC. 2. DOMESTIC TRAFFICKING VICTIMS' FUND.
(a) In General.--Chapter 201 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 3014. Additional special assessment
``(a) In General.--In addition to the assessment imposed under section 3013, the court shall assess an amount of
$5,000 on any non-indigent person or entity convicted of an offense under--
``(1) chapter 77 (relating to peonage, slavery, and trafficking in persons);
``(2) chapter 109A (relating to sexual abuse);
``(3) chapter 110 (relating to sexual exploitation and other abuse of children);
``(4) chapter 117 (relating to transportation for illegal sexual activity and related crimes); or
``(5) section 274 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324) (relating to human smuggling), unless the person induced, assisted, abetted, or aided only an individual who at the time of such action was the alien's spouse, parent, son, or daughter (and no other individual) to enter the United States in violation of law.
``(b) Satisfaction of Other Court-ordered Obligations.--An assessment under subsection (a) shall not be payable until the person subject to the assessment has satisfied all outstanding court-ordered fines and orders of restitution arising from the criminal convictions on which the special assessment is based.
``(c) Establishment of Domestic Trafficking Victims' Fund.--There is established in the Treasury of the United States a fund, to be known as the `Domestic Trafficking Victims' Fund' (referred to in this section as the `Fund'), to be administered by the Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
``(d) Deposits.--Notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, or any other law regarding the crediting of money received for the Government, there shall be deposited in the Fund an amount equal to the amount of the assessments collected under this section, which shall remain available until expended.
``(e) Use of Funds.--
``(1) In general.--From amounts in the Fund, in addition to any other amounts available, and without further appropriation, the Attorney General, in coordination with the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall, for each of fiscal years 2016 through 2020, use amounts available in the Fund to award grants or enhance victims' programming under--
``(A) sections 202, 203, and 204 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 14044a, 14044b, and 14044c);
``(B) subsections (b)(2) and (f) of section 107 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7105); and
``(C) section 214(b) of the Victims of Child Abuse Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 13002(b)).
``(2) Grants.--Of the amounts in the Fund used under paragraph (1), not less than $2,000,000 shall be used for grants to provide services for child pornography victims under section 214(b) of the Victims of Child Abuse Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 13002(b)).
``(3) Limitations.--Amounts in the Fund, or otherwise transferred from the Fund, shall be subject to the limitations on the use or expending of amounts described in sections 506 and 507 of division H of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 (Public Law 113-76; 128 Stat. 409) to the same extent as if amounts in the Fund were funds appropriated under division H of such Act.
``(f) Transfers.--
``(1) In general.--Effective on the day after the date of enactment of the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015, on September 30 of each fiscal year, all unobligated balances in the Fund shall be transferred to the Crime Victims Fund established under section 1402 of the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10601).
``(2) Availability.--Amounts transferred under paragraph
(1)--
``(A) shall be available for any authorized purpose of the Crime Victims Fund; and
``(B) shall remain available until expended.
``(g) Collection Method.--The amount assessed under subsection (a) shall, subject to subsection (b), be collected in the manner that fines are collected in criminal cases.
``(h) Duration of Obligation.--The obligation to pay an assessment imposed on or after the date of enactment of the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015 shall not cease until the assessment is paid in full.''.
(b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 201 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 3013 the following:
``3014. Additional special assessment.''.
SEC. 3. OFFICIAL RECOGNITION OF AMERICAN VICTIMS OF HUMAN
TRAFFICKING.
Section 107 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7105) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (f) (as originally enacted), as subsection (h); and
(2) in subsection (f) (as added by section 213(a)(1) of the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-457)), by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Official recognition of american victims of human trafficking.--
``(A) In general.--Upon receiving credible information that establishes, by a preponderance of the evidence, that a covered individual is a victim of a severe form of trafficking and at the request of the covered individual, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall promptly issue a determination that the covered individual is a victim of a severe form of trafficking. The Secretary shall have exclusive authority to make such a determination.
``(B) Covered individual defined.--In this subsection, the term `covered individual' means--
``(i) a citizen of the United States; or
``(ii) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence
(as defined in section 101(20) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(20))).
``(C) Procedure.--For purposes of this paragraph, in determining whether a covered individual has provided credible information that the covered individual is a victim of a severe form of trafficking, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall consider all relevant and credible evidence, and if appropriate, consult with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Secretary of Labor.
``(D) Presumptive evidence.--For purposes of this paragraph, the following forms of evidence shall receive deference in determining whether a covered individual has established that the covered individual is a victim of a severe form of trafficking:
``(i) A sworn statement by the covered individual or a representative of the covered individual if the covered individual is present at the time of such statement but not able to competently make such sworn statement.
``(ii) Police, government agency, or court records or files.
``(iii) Documentation from a social services, trafficking, or domestic violence program, child welfare or runaway and homeless youth program, or a legal, clinical, medical, or other professional from whom the covered individual has sought assistance in dealing with the crime.
``(iv) A statement from any other individual with knowledge of the circumstances that provided the basis for the claim.
``(v) Physical evidence.
``(E) Regulations required.--Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall adopt regulations to implement this paragraph.
``(F) Rule of construction; official recognition optional.--Nothing in this paragraph may be construed to require a covered individual to obtain a determination under this paragraph in order to be defined or classified as a victim of a severe form of trafficking under this section.''. SEC. 4. VICTIM-CENTERED CHILD HUMAN TRAFFICKING DETERRENCE
BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Section 203 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 14044b) is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 203. VICTIM-CENTERED CHILD HUMAN TRAFFICKING
DETERRENCE BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.
``(a) Grants Authorized.--The Attorney General may award block grants to an eligible entity to develop, improve, or expand domestic child human trafficking deterrence programs that assist law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judicial officials, and qualified victims' services organizations in collaborating to rescue and restore the lives of victims, while investigating and prosecuting offenses involving child human trafficking.
``(b) Authorized Activities.--Grants awarded under subsection (a) may be used for--
``(1) the establishment or enhancement of specialized training programs for law enforcement officers, first responders, health care officials, child welfare officials, juvenile justice personnel, prosecutors, and judicial personnel to--
``(A) identify victims and acts of child human trafficking;
``(B) address the unique needs of child victims of human trafficking;
``(C) facilitate the rescue of child victims of human trafficking;
``(D) investigate and prosecute acts of human trafficking, including the soliciting, patronizing, or purchasing of commercial sex acts from children, as well as training to build cases against complex criminal networks involved in child human trafficking;
``(E) use laws that prohibit acts of child human trafficking, child sexual abuse, and child rape, and to assist in the development of State and local laws to prohibit, investigate, and prosecute acts of child human trafficking; and
``(F) implement and provide education on safe harbor laws enacted by States, aimed at preventing the criminalization and prosecution of child sex trafficking victims for prostitution offenses;
``(2) the establishment or enhancement of dedicated anti-trafficking law enforcement units and task forces to investigate child human trafficking offenses and to rescue victims, including--
``(A) funding salaries, in whole or in part, for law enforcement officers, including patrol officers, detectives, and investigators, except that the percentage of the salary of the law enforcement officer paid for by funds from a grant awarded under this section shall not be more than the percentage of the officer's time on duty that is dedicated to working on cases involving child human trafficking;
``(B) investigation expenses for cases involving child human trafficking, including--
``(i) wire taps;
``(ii) consultants with expertise specific to cases involving child human trafficking;
``(iii) travel; and
``(iv) other technical assistance expenditures;
``(C) dedicated anti-trafficking prosecution units, including the funding of salaries for State and local prosecutors, including assisting in paying trial expenses for prosecution of child human trafficking offenders, except that the percentage of the total salary of a State or local prosecutor that is paid using an award under this section shall be not more than the percentage of the total number of hours worked by the prosecutor that is spent working on cases involving child human trafficking;
``(D) the establishment of child human trafficking victim witness safety, assistance, and relocation programs that encourage cooperation with law enforcement investigations of crimes of child human trafficking by leveraging existing resources and delivering child human trafficking victims' services through coordination with--
``(i) child advocacy centers;
``(ii) social service agencies;
``(iii) State governmental health service agencies;
``(iv) housing agencies;
``(v) legal services agencies; and
``(vi) non-governmental organizations and shelter service providers with substantial experience in delivering wrap-around services to victims of child human trafficking; and
``(E) the establishment or enhancement of other necessary victim assistance programs or personnel, such as victim or child advocates, child-protective services, child forensic interviews, or other necessary service providers; and
``(3) the establishment or enhancement of problem solving court programs for trafficking victims that include--
``(A) mandatory and regular training requirements for judicial officials involved in the administration or operation of the court program described under this paragraph;
``(B) continuing judicial supervision of victims of child human trafficking who have been identified by a law enforcement or judicial officer as a potential victim of child human trafficking, regardless of whether the victim has been charged with a crime related to human trafficking;
``(C) the development of a specialized and individualized, court-ordered treatment program for identified victims of child human trafficking, including--
``(i) State-administered outpatient treatment;
``(ii) life skills training;
``(iii) housing placement;
``(iv) vocational training;
``(v) education;
``(vi) family support services; and
``(vii) job placement;
``(D) centralized case management involving the consolidation of all of each child human trafficking victim's cases and offenses, and the coordination of all trafficking victim treatment programs and social services;
``(E) regular and mandatory court appearances by the victim during the duration of the treatment program for purposes of ensuring compliance and effectiveness;
``(F) the ultimate dismissal of relevant non-violent criminal charges against the victim, where such victim successfully complies with the terms of the court-ordered treatment program; and
``(G) collaborative efforts with child advocacy centers, child welfare agencies, shelters, and non-governmental organizations with substantial experience in delivering wrap-around services to victims of child human trafficking to provide services to victims and encourage cooperation with law enforcement.
``(c) Application.--
``(1) In general.--An eligible entity shall submit an application to the Attorney General for a grant under this section in such form and manner as the Attorney General may require.
``(2) Required information.--An application submitted under this subsection shall--
``(A) describe the activities for which assistance under this section is sought;
``(B) include a detailed plan for the use of funds awarded under the grant;
``(C) provide such additional information and assurances as the Attorney General determines to be necessary to ensure compliance with the requirements of this section; and
``(D) disclose--
``(i) any other grant funding from the Department of Justice or from any other Federal department or agency for purposes similar to those described in subsection (b) for which the eligible entity has applied, and which application is pending on the date of the submission of an application under this section; and
``(ii) any other such grant funding that the eligible entity has received during the 5-year period ending on the date of the submission of an application under this section.
``(3) Preference.--In reviewing applications submitted in accordance with paragraphs (1) and (2), the Attorney General shall give preference to grant applications if--
``(A) the application includes a plan to use awarded funds to engage in all activities described under paragraphs (1) through (3) of subsection (b); or
``(B) the application includes a plan by the State or unit of local government to continue funding of all activities funded by the award after the expiration of the award.
``(d) Duration and Renewal of Award.--
``(1) In general.--A grant under this section shall expire 3 years after the date of award of the grant.
``(2) Renewal.--A grant under this section shall be renewable not more than 2 times and for a period of not greater than 2 years.
``(e) Evaluation.--The Attorney General shall--
``(1) enter into a contract with a nongovernmental organization, including an academic or nonprofit organization, that has experience with issues related to child human trafficking and evaluation of grant programs to conduct periodic evaluations of grants made under this section to determine the impact and effectiveness of programs funded with grants awarded under this section; and
``(2) submit the results of any evaluation conducted pursuant to paragraph (1) to--
``(A) the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate; and
``(B) the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.
``(f) Mandatory Exclusion.--An eligible entity awarded funds under this section that is found to have used grant funds for any unauthorized expenditure or otherwise unallowable cost shall not be eligible for any grant funds awarded under the block grant for 2 fiscal years following the year in which the unauthorized expenditure or unallowable cost is reported.
``(g) Compliance Requirement.--An eligible entity shall not be eligible to receive a grant under this section if within the 5 fiscal years before submitting an application for a grant under this section, the grantee has been found to have violated the terms or conditions of a Government grant program by utilizing grant funds for unauthorized expenditures or otherwise unallowable costs.
``(h) Administrative Cap.--The cost of administering the grants authorized by this section shall not exceed 5 percent of the total amount expended to carry out this section.
``(i) Federal Share.--The Federal share of the cost of a program funded by a grant awarded under this section shall be--
``(1) 70 percent in the first year;
``(2) 60 percent in the second year; and
``(3) 50 percent in the third year, and in all subsequent years.
``(j) Authorization of Funding; Fully Offset.--For purposes of carrying out this section, the Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, is authorized to award not more than $7,000,000 of the funds available in the Domestic Trafficking Victims' Fund, established under section 3014 of title 18, United States Code, for each of fiscal years 2016 through 2020.
``(k) Definitions.--In this section--
``(1) the term `child' means a person under the age of 18;
``(2) the term `child advocacy center' means a center created under subtitle A of the Victims of Child Abuse Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 13001 et seq.);
``(3) the term `child human trafficking' means 1 or more severe forms of trafficking in persons (as defined in section 103 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7102)) involving a victim who is a child; and
``(4) the term `eligible entity' means a State or unit of local government that--
``(A) has significant criminal activity involving child human trafficking;
``(B) has demonstrated cooperation between Federal, State, local, and, where applicable, tribal law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, and social service providers in addressing child human trafficking;
``(C) has developed a workable, multi-disciplinary plan to combat child human trafficking, including--
``(i) the establishment of a shelter for victims of child human trafficking, through existing or new facilities;
``(ii) the provision of trauma-informed, gender-responsive rehabilitative care to victims of child human trafficking;
``(iii) the provision of specialized training for law enforcement officers and social service providers for all forms of human trafficking, with a focus on domestic child human trafficking;
``(iv) prevention, deterrence, and prosecution of offenses involving child human trafficking, including soliciting, patronizing, or purchasing human acts with children;
``(v) cooperation or referral agreements with organizations providing outreach or other related services to runaway and homeless youth;
``(vi) law enforcement protocols or procedures to screen all individuals arrested for prostitution, whether adult or child, for victimization by sex trafficking and by other crimes, such as sexual assault and domestic violence; and
``(vii) cooperation or referral agreements with State child welfare agencies and child advocacy centers; and
``(D) provides an assurance that, under the plan under subparagraph (C), a victim of child human trafficking shall not be required to collaborate with law enforcement officers to have access to any shelter or services provided with a grant under this section.
``(l) Grant Accountability; Specialized Victims' Service Requirement.--No grant funds under this section may be awarded or transferred to any entity unless such entity has demonstrated substantial experience providing services to victims of human trafficking or related populations (such as runaway and homeless youth), or employs staff specialized in the treatment of human trafficking victims.''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents in section 1(b) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (22 U.S.C. 7101 note) is amended by striking the item relating to section 203 and inserting the following:
``Sec. 203. Victim-centered child human trafficking deterrence block grant program.''.
SEC. 5. DIRECT SERVICES FOR VICTIMS OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.
The Victims of Child Abuse Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 13001 et seq.) is amended--
(1) in section 212(5) (42 U.S.C. 13001a(5)), by inserting
``, including human trafficking and the production of child pornography'' before the semicolon at the end; and
(2) in section 214 (42 U.S.C. 13002)--
(A) by redesignating subsections (b), (c), and (d) as subsections (c), (d), and (e), respectively; and
(B) by inserting after subsection (a) the following:
``(b) Direct Services for Victims of Child Pornography.--The Administrator, in coordination with the Director and with the Director of the Office of Victims of Crime, may make grants to develop and implement specialized programs to identify and provide direct services to victims of child pornography.''.
SEC. 6. INCREASING COMPENSATION AND RESTITUTION FOR
TRAFFICKING VICTIMS.
(a) Amendments to Title 18.--Section 1594 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (d)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) by striking ``that was used or'' and inserting ``that was involved in, used, or'';
(ii) by inserting ``, and any property traceable to such property'' after ``such violation''; and
(B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``, or any property traceable to such property'' after ``such violation'';
(2) in subsection (e)(1)(A)--
(A) by striking ``used or'' and inserting ``involved in, used, or''; and
(B) by inserting ``, and any property traceable to such property'' after ``any violation of this chapter'';
(3) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (g); and
(4) by inserting after subsection (e) the following:
``(f) Transfer of Forfeited Assets.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Attorney General shall transfer assets forfeited pursuant to this section, or the proceeds derived from the sale thereof, to satisfy victim restitution orders arising from violations of this chapter.
``(2) Priority.--Transfers pursuant to paragraph (1) shall have priority over any other claims to the assets or their proceeds.
``(3) Use of non-forfeited assets.--Transfers pursuant to paragraph (1) shall not reduce or otherwise mitigate the obligation of a person convicted of a violation of this chapter to satisfy the full amount of a restitution order through the use of non-forfeited assets or to reimburse the Attorney General for the value of assets or proceeds transferred under this subsection through the use of non-forfeited assets.''.
(b) Amendment to Title 28.--Section 524(c)(1)(B) of title 28, United States Code, is amended by inserting ``chapter 77 of title 18,'' after ``criminal drug laws of the United States or of''.
(c) Amendments to Title 31.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 97 of title 31, United States Code, is amended--
(A) by redesignating section 9703 (as added by section 638(b)(1) of the Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government Appropriations Act, 1993 (Public Law 102-393; 106 Stat. 1779)) as section 9705; and
(B) in section 9705(a), as redesignated--
(i) in paragraph (1)--
(I) in subparagraph (I)--
(aa) by striking ``payment'' and inserting ``Payment''; and
(bb) by striking the semicolon at the end and inserting a period; and
(II) in subparagraph (J), by striking ``payment'' and inserting ``Payment''; and
(ii) in paragraph (2)--
(I) in subparagraph (B)--
(aa) in clause (iii)--
(AA) in subclause (I), by striking ``or'' and inserting
``of''; and
(BB) in subclause (III), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(bb) in clause (iv), by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; and''; and
(cc) by inserting after clause (iv) the following:
``(v) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement with respect to a violation of chapter 77 of title 18 (relating to human trafficking);'';
(II) in subparagraph (G), by adding ``and'' at the end; and
(III) in subparagraph (H), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a period.
(2) Technical and conforming amendments.--
(A) Cross references.--
(i) Title 28.--Section 524(c) of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
(I) in paragraph (4)(C), by striking ``section 9703(g)(4)(A)(ii)'' and inserting ``section 9705(g)(4)(A)'';
(II) in paragraph (10), by striking ``section 9703(p)'' and inserting ``section 9705(p)''; and
(III) in paragraph (11), by striking ``section 9703'' and inserting ``section 9705''.
(ii) Title 31.--Title 31, United States Code, is amended--
(I) in section 312(d), by striking ``section 9703'' and inserting ``section 9705''; and
(II) in section 5340(1), by striking ``section 9703(p)(1)'' and inserting ``section 9705(p)(1)''.
(iii) Title 39.--Section 2003(e)(1) of title 39, United States Code, is amended by striking ``section 9703(p)'' and inserting ``section 9705(p)''.
(B) Table of sections.--The table of sections for chapter 97 of title 31, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``9701. Fees and charges for Government services and things of value.
``9702. Investment of trust funds.
``9703. Managerial accountability and flexibility.
``9704. Pilot projects for managerial accountability and flexibility.
``9705. Department of the Treasury Forfeiture Fund.''.
SEC. 7. STREAMLINING HUMAN TRAFFICKING INVESTIGATIONS.
Section 2516 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (a), by inserting a comma after
``weapons)'';
(B) in subparagraph (c)--
(i) by inserting ``section 1581 (peonage), section 1584
(involuntary servitude), section 1589 (forced labor), section 1590 (trafficking with respect to peonage, slavery, involuntary servitude, or forced labor),'' before ``section 1591'';
(ii) by inserting ``section 1592 (unlawful conduct with respect to documents in furtherance of trafficking, peonage, slavery, involuntary servitude, or forced labor),'' before
``section 1751'';
(iii) by inserting a comma after ``virus)'';
(iv) by striking ``,, section'' and inserting a comma;
(v) by striking ``or'' after ``misuse of passports),''; and
(vi) by inserting ``or'' before ``section 555'';
(C) in subparagraph (j), by striking ``pipeline,)'' and inserting ``pipeline),''; and
(D) in subparagraph (p), by striking ``documents, section 1028A (relating to aggravated identity theft))'' and inserting ``documents), section 1028A (relating to aggravated identity theft)''; and
(2) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``human trafficking, child sexual exploitation, child pornography production,'' after ``kidnapping''.
SEC. 8. ENHANCING HUMAN TRAFFICKING REPORTING.
(a) In General.--Section 505 of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3755) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(i) Part 1 Violent Crimes To Include Human Trafficking.--For purposes of this section, the term `part 1 violent crimes' shall include severe forms of trafficking in persons
(as defined in section 103 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7102)).''.
(b) Crime Control Act Amendments.--Section 3702 of the Crime Control Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 5780) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and'' at the end; and
(2) in paragraph (4)--
(A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking
``paragraph (2)'' and inserting ``paragraph (3)'';
(B) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``and a photograph taken within the previous 180 days'' after ``dental records'';
(C) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(D) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D); and
(E) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
``(C) notify the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children of each report received relating to a child reported missing from a foster care family home or childcare institution; and''.
SEC. 9. REDUCING DEMAND FOR SEX TRAFFICKING.
(a) In General.--Section 1591 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``or maintains'' and inserting ``maintains, patronizes, or solicits'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``or obtained'' and inserting ``obtained, patronized, or solicited''; and
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``or obtained'' and inserting ``obtained, patronized, or solicited''; and
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) by striking ``or maintained'' and inserting ``, maintained, patronized, or solicited''; and
(B) by striking ``knew that the person'' and inserting
``knew, or recklessly disregarded the fact, that the person''.
(b) Definition Amended.--Section 103(10) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7102(10)) is amended by striking ``or obtaining'' and inserting
``obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting''.
(c) Purpose.--The purpose of the amendments made by this section is to clarify the range of conduct punished as sex trafficking.
SEC. 10. USING EXISTING TASK FORCES AND COMPONENTS TO TARGET
OFFENDERS WHO EXPLOIT CHILDREN.
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall ensure that--
(1) all task forces and working groups within the Innocence Lost National Initiative engage in activities, programs, or operations to increase the investigative capabilities of State and local law enforcement officers in the detection, investigation, and prosecution of persons who patronize, or solicit children for sex; and
(2) all components and task forces with jurisdiction to detect, investigate, and prosecute cases of child labor trafficking engage in activities, programs, or operations to increase the capacity of such components to deter and punish child labor trafficking.
SEC. 11. TARGETING CHILD PREDATORS.
(a) Clarifying That Child Pornography Producers Are Human Traffickers.--Section 2423(f) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``means (1) a'' and inserting the following: ``means--
``(1) a'';
(2) by striking ``United States; or (2) any'' and inserting the following: ``United States;
``(2) any''; and
(3) by striking the period at the end and inserting the following: ``; or
``(3) production of child pornography (as defined in section 2256(8)).''.
(b) Holding Sex Traffickers Accountable.--Section 2423(g) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking ``a preponderance of the evidence'' and inserting ``clear and convincing evidence''.
SEC. 12. MONITORING ALL HUMAN TRAFFICKERS AS VIOLENT
CRIMINALS.
Section 3156(a)(4)(C) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting ``77,'' after ``chapter''.
SEC. 13. CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS.
(a) In General.--Section 3771 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by adding at the end the following:
``(9) The right to be informed in a timely manner of any plea bargain or deferred prosecution agreement.
``(10) The right to be informed of the rights under this section and the services described in section 503(c) of the Victims' Rights and Restitution Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 10607(c)) and provided contact information for the Office of the Victims' Rights Ombudsman of the Department of Justice.'';
(2) in subsection (d)(3), in the fifth sentence, by inserting ``, unless the litigants, with the approval of the court, have stipulated to a different time period for consideration'' before the period; and
(3) in subsection (e)--
(A) by striking ``this chapter, the term'' and inserting the following: ``this chapter:
``(1) Court of appeals.--The term `court of appeals' means--
``(A) the United States court of appeals for the judicial district in which a defendant is being prosecuted; or
``(B) for a prosecution in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
``(2) Crime victim.--
``(A) In general.--The term'';
(B) by striking ``In the case'' and inserting the following:
``(B) Minors and certain other victims.--In the case''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) District court; court.--The terms `district court' and `court' include the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.''.
(b) Crime Victims Fund.--Section 1402(d)(3)(A)(i) of the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10601(d)(3)(A)(i)) is amended by inserting ``section'' before ``3771''.
(c) Appellate Review of Petitions Relating to Crime Victims' Rights.--
(1) In general.--Section 3771(d)(3) of title 18, United States Code, as amended by subsection (a)(2) of this section, is amended by inserting after the fifth sentence the following: ``In deciding such application, the court of appeals shall apply ordinary standards of appellate review.''.
(2) Application.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) shall apply with respect to any petition for a writ of mandamus filed under section 3771(d)(3) of title 18, United States Code, that is pending on the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 14. COMBAT HUMAN TRAFFICKING ACT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Combat Human Trafficking Act of 2015''.
(b) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Commercial sex act; severe forms of trafficking in persons; state.--The terms ``commercial sex act'', ``severe forms of trafficking in persons'', and ``State'' have the meanings given those terms in section 103 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7102).
(2) Covered offender.--The term ``covered offender'' means an individual who obtains, patronizes, or solicits a commercial sex act involving a person subject to severe forms of trafficking in persons.
(3) Covered offense.--The term ``covered offense'' means the provision, obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting of a commercial sex act involving a person subject to severe forms of trafficking in persons.
(4) Federal law enforcement officer.--The term ``Federal law enforcement officer'' has the meaning given the term in section 115 of title 18, United States Code.
(5) Local law enforcement officer.--The term ``local law enforcement officer'' means any officer, agent, or employee of a unit of local government authorized by law or by a local government agency to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of criminal law.
(6) State law enforcement officer.--The term ``State law enforcement officer'' means any officer, agent, or employee of a State authorized by law or by a State government agency to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of criminal law.
(c) Department of Justice Training and Policy for Law Enforcement Officers, Prosecutors, and Judges.--
(1) Training.--
(A) Law enforcement officers.--The Attorney General shall ensure that each anti-human trafficking program operated by the Department of Justice, including each anti-human trafficking training program for Federal, State, or local law enforcement officers, includes technical training on--
(i) effective methods for investigating and prosecuting covered offenders; and
(ii) facilitating the provision of physical and mental health services by health care providers to persons subject to severe forms of trafficking in persons.
(B) Federal prosecutors.--The Attorney General shall ensure that each anti-human trafficking program operated by the Department of Justice for United States attorneys or other Federal prosecutors includes training on seeking restitution for offenses under chapter 77 of title 18, United States Code, to ensure that each United States attorney or other Federal prosecutor, upon obtaining a conviction for such an offense, requests a specific amount of restitution for each victim of the offense without regard to whether the victim requests restitution.
(C) Judges.--The Federal Judicial Center shall provide training to judges relating to the application of section 1593 of title 18, United States Code, with respect to ordering restitution for victims of offenses under chapter 77 of such title.
(2) Policy for federal law enforcement officers.--The Attorney General shall ensure that Federal law enforcement officers are engaged in activities, programs, or operations involving the detection, investigation, and prosecution of covered offenders.
(d) Minimum Period of Supervised Release for Conspiracy to Commit Commercial Child Sex Trafficking.--Section 3583(k) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting
``1594(c),'' after ``1591,''.
(e) Bureau of Justice Statistics Report on State Enforcement of Human Trafficking Prohibitions.--The Director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics shall--
(1) prepare an annual report on--
(A) the rates of--
(i) arrest of individuals by State law enforcement officers for a covered offense;
(ii) prosecution (including specific charges) of individuals in State court systems for a covered offense; and
(iii) conviction of individuals in State court systems for a covered offense; and
(B) sentences imposed on individuals convicted in State court systems for a covered offense; and
(2) submit the annual report prepared under paragraph (1) to--
(A) the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives;
(B) the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate;
(C) the Task Force;
(D) the Senior Policy Operating Group established under section 105(g) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7103(g)); and
(E) the Attorney General.
SEC. 15. GRANT ACCOUNTABILITY.
(a) Definition.--In this section, the term ``covered grant'' means a grant awarded by the Attorney General under section 203 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 14044b), as amended by section 4.
(b) Accountability.--All covered grants shall be subject to the following accountability provisions:
(1) Audit requirement.--
(A) In general.--Beginning in the first fiscal year beginning after the date of enactment of this Act, and in each fiscal year thereafter, the Inspector General of the Department of Justice shall conduct audits of recipients of a covered grant to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse of funds by grantees. The Inspector General shall determine the appropriate number of grantees to be audited each year.
(B) Definition.--In this paragraph, the term ``unresolved audit finding'' means a finding in the final audit report of the Inspector General that the audited grantee has utilized grant funds for an unauthorized expenditure or otherwise unallowable cost that is not closed or resolved within 12 months from the date when the final audit report is issued.
(C) Mandatory exclusion.--A recipient of a covered grant that is found to have an unresolved audit finding shall not be eligible to receive a covered grant during the following 2 fiscal years.
(D) Priority.--In awarding covered grants the Attorney General shall give priority to eligible entities that did not have an unresolved audit finding during the 3 fiscal years prior to submitting an application for a covered grant.
(E) Reimbursement.--If an entity is awarded a covered grant during the 2-fiscal-year period in which the entity is barred from receiving grants under subparagraph (C), the Attorney General shall--
(i) deposit an amount equal to the grant funds that were improperly awarded to the grantee into the General Fund of the Treasury; and
(ii) seek to recoup the costs of the repayment to the fund from the grant recipient that was erroneously awarded grant funds.
(2) Nonprofit organization requirements.--
(A) Definition.--For purposes of this paragraph and covered grants, the term ``nonprofit organization'' means an organization that is described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of such Code.
(B) Prohibition.--The Attorney General may not award a covered grant to a nonprofit organization that holds money in offshore accounts for the purpose of avoiding paying the tax described in section 511(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
(C) Disclosure.--Each nonprofit organization that is awarded a covered grant and uses the procedures prescribed in regulations to create a rebuttable presumption of reasonableness for the compensation of its officers, directors, trustees and key employees, shall disclose to the Attorney General, in the application for the grant, the process for determining such compensation, including the independent persons involved in reviewing and approving such compensation, the comparability data used, and contemporaneous substantiation of the deliberation and decision. Upon request, the Attorney General shall make the information disclosed under this subsection available for public inspection.
(3) Conference expenditures.--
(A) Limitation.--No amounts transferred to the Department of Justice under this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, may be used by the Attorney General, or by any individual or organization awarded discretionary funds through a cooperative agreement under this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, to host or support any expenditure for conferences that uses more than $20,000 in Department funds, unless the Deputy Attorney General or such Assistant Attorney Generals, Directors, or principal deputies as the Deputy Attorney General may designate, provides prior written authorization that the funds may be expended to host a conference.
(B) Written approval.--Written approval under subparagraph
(A) shall include a written estimate of all costs associated with the conference, including the cost of all food and beverages, audiovisual equipment, honoraria for speakers, and any entertainment.
(C) Report.--The Deputy Attorney General shall submit an annual report to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives on all approved conference expenditures referenced in this paragraph.
(D) Annual certification.--Beginning in the first fiscal year beginning after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall submit, to the Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives, an annual certification that--
(i) all audits issued by the Office of the Inspector General under paragraph (1) have been completed and reviewed by the appropriate Assistant Attorney General or Director;
(ii) all mandatory exclusions required under paragraph
(1)(C) have been issued;
(iii) all reimbursements required under paragraph (1)(E) have been made; and
(iv) includes a list of any grant recipients excluded under paragraph (1) from the previous year.
(4) Prohibition on lobbying activity.--
(A) In general.--Amounts awarded under this Act, or any amendments made by this Act, may not be utilized by any grant recipient to--
(i) lobby any representative of the Department of Justice regarding the award of grant funding; or
(ii) lobby any representative of a Federal, State, local, or tribal government regarding the award of grant funding.
(B) Penalty.--If the Attorney General determines that any recipient of a covered grant has violated subparagraph (A), the Attorney General shall--
(i) require the grant recipient to repay the grant in full; and
(ii) prohibit the grant recipient from receiving another covered grant for not less than 5 years.
____________________
Alerts Sign-up