Report text available as:

(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip?


                                                       Calendar No. 384
104th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE

 2d Session                                                     104-269
_______________________________________________________________________


 
              TO REAUTHORIZE THE HATE CRIME STATISTICS ACT

                                _______


                  May 13, 1996.--Ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


Mr. Hatch, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 1624]

    The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the 
bill (S. 1624) to reauthorize the Hate Crime Statistics Act, 
having considered the same, reports favorably thereon and 
recommend that the bill do pass.

                               I. Purpose

    The purpose of the proposed legislation is to reauthorize 
permanently the Hate Crime Statistics Act, which requires the 
Attorney General to establish reporting guidelines for the 
collection of, and to collect, data about crimes which manifest 
evidence of prejudice based on race, religion, sexual 
orientation, ethnicity or disability. Reauthorization of the 
Act is necessary to require the Attorney General to continue 
the collection of data on hate crimes and to publish annual 
summaries of the acquired data, thereby providing information 
which can help local law enforcement agencies and local 
communities combat hate crimes more effectively by identifying 
over time their frequency, location, and other patterns.

                        II. Legislative History

    The Hate Crimes Statistics Act was signed into law on April 
23, 1990. The Act required the Attorney General acquire data 
about crimes which manifest evidence of prejudice based on 
race, religion, sexual orientation or ethnicity, including the 
crimes of murder, non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, 
aggravated assault, simple assault, intimidation, arson and 
destruction, damage or vandalism of property. In 1994, the Act 
was amended to add crimes which manifest prejudice based on 
disability. The Attorney General was also required to establish 
guidelines for the collection of such data, including the 
evidence and criteria that must be present for a finding of 
manifest prejudice in connection with the classification of a 
crime as bias-motivated. The Act stipulated that the data be 
acquired for calendar year 1990 and each of the four succeeding 
calendar years. In addition, the Act mandated the Attorney 
General to publish an annual summary of the acquired data.
    The Act did not create a private right of action, including 
an action based on sexual orientation, or limit any existing 
cause of action or right to bring an action, including under 
the Administrative Procedure Act. The Act also provides that 
nothing in the Act shall be construed, nor shall any funds 
appropriated to carry out the purpose of the Act be used, to 
promote or encourage homosexuality, and includes congressional 
findings: ``(1) the American family life is the foundation of 
American Society, (2) Federal policy should encourage the well-
being, financial security, and health of the American family, 
(3) schools should not de-emphasize the critical value of 
American family life.''

                   III. Text of S. 1624, as Reported

                         [104th Cong; 2d Sess.]

  A BILL To reauthorize the Hate Crime Statistics Act, and for other 
                                purposes

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

SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION.

    The first section of the Hate Crime Statistics Act (28 
U.S.C. 534 note) is amended:
          (1) in subsection (b), by striking ``for the calendar 
        year 1990 and each of the succeeding 4 calendar years'' 
        and inserting ``for each calendar year''; and
          (2) in subsection (c), by striking ``through fiscal 
        year 1994''.

                    IV. Section-by-Section Analysis

Section 1

    This section amends the Hate Crime Statistics Act by 
striking from subsection (b)(1) the language ``for the calendar 
year 1990 and each of the succeeding 4 calendar years'' and 
inserting ``for each calendar year.'' This section further 
amends the Act by striking from subsection (c) the words 
``through fiscal year 1994.''

                             V. Discussion

    Prior to the adoption of the Hate Crime Statistics Act, 
there was no national data collection on crimes motivated by 
bias and prejudice. While individual incidents of hate crimes 
were sometimes reported in the news media, the absence of 
national data made it difficult to determine the actual number 
and nature of such incidents, whether particular incidents were 
isolated events or symptoms of a more pervasive problem, 
whether certain groups are more frequently victimized than 
others, and whether hate-related violence is more prevalent in 
particular sections of the country or in particular 
communities.
    As set forth in the statement of Mr. Charles W. Archer, 
Assistant Director, Criminal Justice Information Services 
Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, before the Judiciary 
Committee at its hearing on reauthorization of the Hate Crime 
Statistics Act held on March 19, 1996, when the Act was enacted 
in 1990, the Attorney General delegated to the FBI the 
development of a hate crime data collection program and 
implementation of the Act. To lessen the reporting burden 
placed on State and local law enforcement agencies, the FBI 
consolidated this program within the FBI's existing Uniform 
Crime Reports Summary and National Incident-Based Reporting 
Systems and developed uniform standards and procedures which 
define and help identify criminal offenses that are motivated 
by the offender's bias against the victim's race, religion, 
disability, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. Because hate 
crimes are not separate, distinct offenses, but rather 
traditional crimes that are motivated by the offender's bias, 
hate crime reporting is complicated to the extent that there is 
difficulty in determining the offender's motivation. Incidents 
are reported as hate crimes only if the law enforcement 
investigation determines sufficient facts to lead a reasonable 
and prudent person to conclude that the offender's actions were 
motivated, in whole or in part, by bias. To help local law 
enforcement agencies develop methods by which to identify hate 
crimes accurately, the FBI has made the education and training 
of local law enforcement officers in the investigation, 
identification, reporting and appropriate handling of hate 
crimes a priority.
    Like all other crimes reported under the Uniform Crime 
Reports, participation by State and local law enforcement 
agencies in the hate crime data collection program is 
voluntary. During 1991, the first full year of the collection 
program, a total of 2,771 agencies in 32 States submitted data. 
By 1994, that figure had increased to approximately 7,400 law 
enforcement agencies from 43 States and the District of 
Columbia, representing 58 percent of the United States 
population.
    Every crime is, of course, is a terrible event. But the 
hate crime is of a particularly insidious nature. Americans 
cherish their individualism, and are proud to be a society of 
individualists and of individual rights. But individual human 
beings flourish best as members of families, neighborhoods, 
communities and our Nation. As Steven Arent of the Anti-
Defamation League testified at the March 19, 1996, hearing, 
``(t)he damage done by hate crimes cannot be measured solely in 
terms of physical injury or dollars and cents.'' The hate crime 
atomizes the individual, splitting the individual victim apart 
from his or her neighbors and community. It isolates the victim 
because of who he or she is. The hate crime emphasizes the 
differences among our people, not as the strengths they are in 
this diverse country, but as a means of dividing American from 
American. It submerges the common humanity of all peoples. A 
physical assault upon one's person is horrible enough; when the 
attack is made because of the victim's religion, race, 
ethnicity, disability, or sexual orientation, it inevitably 
creates additional unease, not only on the part of the 
individual victim, but also all of those who are members of the 
same group. For persons who are members of minority groups with 
a history of persecution or mistreatment, hate crimes cause an 
anxiety and concern for the safety that others may take for 
granted. This legislation, and the collection of data on hate 
crimes, can help us address this serious problem within our 
society.
    The Hate Crime Statistics Act has proven successful in its 
initial purpose, the creation of a national data base and 
system for the collection of data on bias-motivated crime. In 
addition, the Act has served as a catalyst for an FBI effort to 
train State and local law enforcement officials about hate 
crimes. Hearings held before the Senate Judiciary Committee's 
Subcommittee on the Constitution in 1992 and 1994 showed that 
one of the prime benefits of the Act has been to help increase 
the awareness and sensitivity of law enforcement with respect 
to hate crimes. Not only do victims of hate crimes benefit from 
a more informed police force, but greater police awareness 
encourages other victims to report hate crimes. Collection of 
this data has helped alert local communities and their law 
enforcement agencies to patterns of hate crimes in their 
neighborhoods and perhaps helped prevent them. In addition, as 
Kansas City Mayor Emanuel Cleaver III and Karen Lawson, 
executive director of the Leadership Conference Education Fund, 
indicated during their testimony at the Committee's March 19, 
1996, hearing, the Act has also helped spur educational efforts 
aimed at enhancing goodwill in our communities.
    While collecting data on hate crimes will not erase 
bigotry, it does provide a valuable tool in the fight against 
bias-motivated criminal conduct. The information collected 
pursuant to this Act is essential in identifying how law 
enforcement should focus its resources in dealing with hate 
crimes. The more informed we are about the scope and nature of 
our communities'' problems with hate crimes, the better we will 
be able to develop effective prevention and prosecution 
strategies, as well as support structures for victims of these 
crimes. The Hate Crime Statistics Act has proven its usefulness 
and deserves the permanent mandate that would be established by 
this bill.

                          VI. Committee Action

    S. 1624 was introduced in the Senate on March 19, 1996, 
sponsored by Senators Hatch and Simon, and cosponsored by 
Senators Specter, Biden, Simpson, Kennedy, Grassley, Kohl, 
DeWine, Feinstein, McConnell, Johnston, D'Amato, Akaka, 
Bingaman, Boxer, Bradley, Campbell, Chafee, Cohen, Dodd, 
Inouye, Jeffords, Kassebaum, Kerry, Levin, Lieberman, Murray, 
Pell, Sarbanes, Wellstone, Harkin, Wyden, and Lautenberg.
    The Committee on the Judiciary held a hearing on S. 1624 
and the issue of the bias-motivated crimes and permanent 
reauthorization of the Hate Crime Statistics Act on March 19, 
1996. Testimony was taken from Mr. Charles W. Archer, Assistant 
Director, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, 
Federal Bureau of Investigation; Hon. Emanuel Cleaver III, 
Mayor of Kansas City, MO, on behalf of the United States 
Conference of Mayors; Mr. Bobby Moody, Chief of Police, 
Covington, GA, on behalf of the International Association of 
Chiefs of Police; Mr. Stephen Arent, Anti-Defamation League; 
and Ms. Karen Lawson, executive director, Leadership Conference 
Education Fund.
    The Senate Committee on the Judiciary, with a quorum 
present, met on Thursday, April 25, 1996, to mark up S. 1624. 
The Committee on the Judiciary passed S. 1624 by voice vote.

                    VII. Regulatory Impact Statement

    Pursuant to paragraph 11(b), rule XXVI of the Standing 
Rules of the Senate, the Committee, after due consideration, 
concludes that S. 1624 will not have direct regulatory impact.

                          VIII. Cost Estimate

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                       Washington, DC, May 7, 1996.
Hon. Orrin G. Hatch,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
reviewed S. 1624, a bill to reauthorize the Hate Crime 
Statistics Act, and for other purposes, as reported by the 
Senate Committee on the Judiciary on April 25, 1996. CBO 
estimates that enacting the bill would result in no significant 
costs to the federal government. S. 1624 would not affect 
direct spending or receipts, so pay-as-you-go procedures would 
not apply. The bill contains no intergovernmental or private 
sector mandates as defined in Public Law 104-4, and would 
impose no direct costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
    S. 1624 would reauthorize the Hate Crime Statistics Act, 
which expired at the end of fiscal year 1994 and required the 
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to collect and report 
statistics on hate crimes. The FBI estimates that it spent less 
than $500,000 in each of the fiscal years 1990 through 1996 to 
comply with the act. Thus, enacting S. 1624 would have no 
significant impact on federal spending.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark 
Grabowicz.
            Sincerely,
                                         June E. O'Neill, Director.

                      IX. Changes in Existing Law

    In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the changes in existing law made 
by the bill as reported by the Committee, are shown as follows 
(existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in bold 
brackets, new matter is printed in italic, and existing law 
with no changes is printed in roman):

                           UNITED STATES CODE

          * * * * * * *

               TITLE 28--JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE

          * * * * * * *

              CHAPTER 33--FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 534. Acquisition, preservation, and exchange of identification 
                    records and information; appointment of officials

    (a) The Attorney General shall--
          * * * * * * *
    (b)(1) Under the authority of section 534 of title 28, 
United States Code, the Attorney General shall acquire data, 
[for the calendar year 1990 and each of the succeeding 4 
calendar years] for each calendar year, about crimes that 
manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, religion, 
disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, including where 
appropriate the crimes of murder, non-negligent manslaughter; 
forcible rape; aggravated assault, simple assault, 
intimidation; arson; and destruction, damage or vandalism of 
property.
    (c) There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as 
may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this section 
[through fiscal year 1994].