F. Sensenbrenner

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Sullivan).

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have been listening with great interest to the three speakers on behalf of my bill on the Democratic side of the aisle, and each of them complained about how long the bankruptcy conference has taken. Believe me, as the chairman of that conference, I am even more frustrated than they are because I have to deal with attempting to negotiate out very complex issues. Mr. Speaker, let me tell the gentleman that we have made Chapter 12 permanent in that bankruptcy conference, and we have made it better for farmers so farmers will get a better deal by having the bankruptcy conference passed and signed into law, not only in Chapter 12, but also on the entire economic effect of bankruptcies on our economy. In the last several years, bankruptcy courts have written off $44 billion of debt every year, and that amounts to $400 of additional cost of goods and services, in effect, a $400 hidden tax on people all throughout this country who pay their bills as agreed. I think practically every farm family, let alone every other family in this country, would rather have that $400 in their pocket rather than having to pay more for goods and services because debts have been written off. One of the purposes of the bankruptcy bill that we have been dealing with has been to drive that $44 billion down so that the hidden tax on every American family would not be as great as $400 a year. Last February I sent an offer to the Senate conferees. They rejected it. They never came back with their own offer; and I have called a meeting of the bankruptcy conference for Tuesday, April 23, 2002. I would like to ask the three Democratic speakers on behalf of Chapter 12 if they would do me a favor, and that is to write the Democratic Senate conferees and ask them to reach an agreement on the bankruptcy bill. If we reach that agreement, I can assure the gentlemen that we can bring that bill to the floor the end of this month or the first part of next month and beat the farm bill conference to the President's desk. I regret even having to talk about this because both Houses of Congress did pass bankruptcy reform legislation in the last Congress that included a permanent extension of Chapter 12, and guess what happened? The former President, Mr. Clinton, pocket vetoed the bill. If he had not done so, we would not be talking about this issue at all.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 4167, the bill under consideration.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4167. This bill reenacts and extends Chapter 12, a specialized form of bankruptcy relief for small family farmers for a period of eight months retroactive to October 1, 2001. Chapter 12 was enacted on a temporary basis in 1986 and has been subsequently extended on several occasions over the years. Without question, the family farmer plays a critical role in our Nation's health and economic well-being. Unfortunately, bad weather, rising energy costs, volatile marketplace conditions, competition from large agri-businesses and economic forces experienced by any small business affect the financial stability of some family farmers. Although Chapter 12 addresses the special needs of family farmers, it is utilized infrequently. While total bankruptcy filings in each of the past 6 years surpassed more than a million cases, the number of Chapter 12 cases has exceeded 1,000 on only one occasion, and that was back in 1996. In the absence of Chapter 12, family farmers may apply for relief under the bankruptcy code's other alternative, although these generally do not work quite as well for farmers as Chapter 12. As my colleagues know, I have consistently supported prior efforts to extend Chapter 12 in this Congress. In addition, I have supported a provision included in both the House and Senate versions of H.R. 333, the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act, that would make Chapter 12 a permanent component of the bankruptcy code. H.R. 333 is currently in conference. As the chairman of the bankruptcy conference, I am pleased to report that the anticipated bankruptcy conference report will likely include a series of other provisions that will give family farmers even more enhanced protections under Chapter 12. These farmer-friendly provisions were included in the bankruptcy conference as part of complex and an extensively negotiable effort. Specifically, the other provisions would, first, increase the debt eligibility limit and require it to be automatically adjusted for inflation so that more family farmers would qualify for relief under Chapter 12. Second, lower the percentage of income that must be derived from farming operations which would also ensure that more farmers would be eligible for Chapter 12 than would be under current law. Third, give farmers more protection with respect to how they may treat the claims of creditors. Fourth, for the first time in the history of Chapter 12, allow certain family fishermen to be eligible for this form of bankruptcy relief. Since August of last year, the House and Senate staff have been actively working to resolve the differences between the respective bills. In February of this year, House conferees sent the Senate a proposed offer resolving all outstanding issues. Although the Senate did not accept the proffer, only a mere handful of issues remain to be resolved. In fact, I have scheduled a meeting of the bankruptcy conferees one week from today for the purpose of resolving these remaining issues. Accordingly, I expect to complete the bankruptcy conference well before the extension of Chapter 12, effectuated by this bill, expires. H.R. 4167 is good for family farmers because it immediately restores Chapter 12 and maintains the status quo for an appropriate period of time. This bill serves to support our efforts in resolving the pending bankruptcy conference which when completed and enacted will provide even more protection for family farmers. Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4167. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith).

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, absolutely. I sent an offer over to the Senate 2 months ago to resolve all of the issues in the bankruptcy conference. They rejected it, but they never came back with a counterproposal of their own. So whatever we send over there, they appear not to like; but they do not have a counterproposal. One of the things I think we are supposed to do in reconciling bills is to go back and forth until something is reached in the middle. I want to bring this matter to a head. I want to get the bankruptcy bill off the national table. I want to get Chapter 12 made better and made permanent, and I want to do it by getting H.R. 333 passed through both Houses and signed by the President of the United States. All I am doing is enlisting the gentleman's help and the help of the two other speakers to write a letter to those folks over there and tell them to be constructive, because they have not been that constructive to date.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4167) to extend for 8 additional months the period for which chapter 12 of title 11 of the United States Code is reenacted.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced a resolution expelling the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) from the House of Representatives. Last week, a Federal court jury in Cleveland found the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) guilty on all 10 felony counts of a criminal indictment. Regretfully, this resolution is necessary because Mr. Traficant foolishly rejected the call of the minority leader to resign. Felons belong in jail and not in Congress. He has broken the public trust by breaking the law; and if he will not voluntarily leave this House, our duty is to remove him. Throughout my tenure in the House, I have consistently taken the position that Members who have been convicted of felonies should be expelled if they do not resign. In 1980, the House expelled Michael Meyers of Pennsylvania after he refused to resign following conviction of Abscam-related felonies. In 1995, Walter Tucker of California was convicted, initially refused to resign, and changed his mind after I introduced an expulsion resolution. Mr. Speaker, I hope that Mr. Traficant will follow the example of Mr. Tucker and save the House the need to debate once again whether felons should continue to serve in Congress.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I will not oppose the motion to instruct conferees with respect to Section 1071 of the Senate amendment to H.R. 2646 because the House is on record as having supported a version of this measure on numerous occasions. I do, however, have concerns about the potential impact this motion may have on another pending conference. Section 1071 in effect would make Chapter 12, a specialized form of bankruptcy relief available to certain family farmers, a permanent component of the Bankruptcy Code retroactive through October 1, 2001. Without question, the family farmer plays a critical role in our Nation's health and economic well-being. Unfortunately, bad weather, rising energy costs, volatile marketplace conditions, competition for large agribusinesses, and the economic forces experienced by any small business affect the financial stability of some family farmers. In response to the specialized needs of small family farmers in financial distress, Chapter 12 of the Bankruptcy Code was enacted on a temporary basis as a part of the Bankruptcy Judges, United States Trustees and Family Farmer Bankruptcy Act of 1986. It has subsequently been extended on several occasions, most recently until October 1 of last year. On the other hand, we know that statistically Chapter 12 is utilized rarely. While total bankruptcy filings in each of the past 6 years has surpassed more than 1 million cases, the number of Chapter 12 cases exceeded 1,000 on only one occasion, and that was back in 1996. So for the past 5 years there have not been even 1,000 Chapter 12 filings. In the absence of Chapter 12, family farmers may apply for relief under the Bankruptcy Code's other alternatives, although these generally do not work quite as well for farmers as does Chapter 12. As you know, I have consistently supported prior efforts to extend Chapter 12 in this Congress. I must note, however, that a substantively identical provision to Section 1071 is already included in H.R. 333, the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act which is currently in conference. And that conference is much further along than the farm bill conference. Since August of last year, the House and Senate staff have been actively working to resolve the differences between the respective bills. In February of this year, the House conferees sent the Senate a proposed offer resolving all outstanding issues. Although the Senate did not accept the proffer, I am pleased to report as of last week there is a mere handful of items that need to be resolved and that the bankruptcy conference is nearly completed. Given this significant progress, it is my expectation that the few remaining matters will be resolved well before the conference on H.R. 2646 is completed. Among the issues resolved in the bankruptcy conference are a series of provisions that give family farmers enhanced protections under Chapter 12. These provisions, in addition to a permanent extension of Chapter 12, are included in the bankruptcy conference as part of a complex and extensively negotiated effort. So merely making Chapter 12 permanent will mean that the enhanced protections that are already agreed to in the bankruptcy conference will end up not becoming a part of the permanent law. And those types of enhanced protections will end up having to start over from scratch. Therefore, I am accordingly quite concerned that the motion to instruct may be simply an effort to cherry-pick one of the provisions which would incentivize others to do the same. I fear that the motion to instruct could reduce the momentum for the bankruptcy conference and lessen support for it, and thereby jeopardize enactment of the other farmer-friendly protections included in the compromise. It is for these very same reasons I have adamantly opposed attempts by others to move other provisions in the bankruptcy bill separately. Again, although I do not oppose the motion to instruct conferees on Section 1071, I am very concerned that it may potentially have a damaging impact on the pending bankruptcy conference and the additional farmer-friendly protections already agreed to. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the motion currently under consideration.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, again, I am not opposed to this motion to instruct, but I think that everybody ought to know what section 1071 of the Senate bill leaves out which is in the agreed-upon provision relative to family farms in the House-Senate compromise and the bankruptcy bill. First of all, both 1071 and the compromise make Chapter 12 permanent. But what 1071 does not do is to increase the debt limits and index that debt limit to inflation. What is being proposed in the Senate version of the farm bill is going to have the debt limit be frozen on what it is now. There also is a provision in the compromise that makes more flexible the percentage of income derived from farming for both spouses. And where one spouse works on the farm and another spouse has got a job off the farm, the current law which they are proposing to make permanent without any improvements, is going to make these types of farmers ineligible for Chapter 12, and they will have to go to either Chapter 11 or Chapter 13. One of the improvements that has been agreed to in the bankruptcy conference is a prohibition on the retroactive assessment of disposable income, not in section 1071; and finally, the House-Senate bankruptcy conference has agreed to include family fishermen under Chapter 12 which is not in section 1071. So even though I am supporting the gentleman's motion, I would really hope that the proponents of this motion would start putting pressure on the conferees over in the other side on the bankruptcy bill because we can make Chapter 12 much better by using the bankruptcy bill as a vehicle. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gekas), the principal author of the bankruptcy bill.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I appreciate the impassioned speech by the gentleman from Illinois. I am afraid he has forgotten a couple of things as he has been talking about how good Chapter 12 is. First of all, Congress did pass an extension of Chapter 12. It was by a voice vote in this House and an overwhelming vote in the Senate as a part of a bankruptcy reform bill, and Chapter 12 would be permanent today if it were not for the fact that President Clinton pocket vetoed the Bankruptcy Reform Act in the last Congress; and in this Congress, the House has been attempting to reach a compromise with the other body in the bankruptcy conference. We sent a proffer to the Senate in February to resolve all of the outstanding issues, and the other body rejected it. So there has not been any negligence on the part of the House of Representatives in reaching a conclusion on this. We still continue our negotiations. The people on the other side of the Capitol are bringing additional issues that were not considered in either House that we continue negotiating. One of my top priorities this year is to get a bankruptcy bill passed and signed into law that will help out everybody in this country, not just the 383 people who filed for Chapter 12 in the year 2001. I need the gentleman's help in getting an overall bankruptcy reform bill passed. Again, I do not have a problem with his motion to instruct, but I hope and pray that the effect of that motion to instruct is not to unravel all of the popular items out of a bankruptcy reform bill so that we do not pass an overall bankruptcy reform bill and get it signed into law. Last year, bankruptcy wrote off $44 billion of debt of bankrupts and that has increased the cost of goods and services by approximately $400 for the average American family from Maine to California, and it seems to me that we should not be letting people who use bankruptcy as a financial planning tool off the hook because that ends up being a tax increase on the overwhelming majority of the American people who pay their debts as agreed, and that is the issue in bankruptcy reform; and that is why we have got to keep all the cars on the train so that we can get this passed and relieve the American people of having to pay the debts of those that use bankruptcy as a financial planning tool. Mr. Speaker, I support the motion to instruct, but let us keep our eye on the ball. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Green), who is the author of the bill.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of H.R. 2146, the Two Strikes and You're Out Child Protection Act. This bill would establish a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment for twice-convicted child sex offenders. The bill states that any person convicted of a Federal sex offense against a person under the age of 17 who has been previously convicted of a similar offense at the State or Federal level would be subject to a mandatory minimum sentence of life imprisonment. The term ``Federal sex offense'' includes various crimes of sexual abuse committed against children and the interstate transportation of minors for sexual purposes. According to the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics, since 1980 the number of persons sentenced for violent sexual assault other than rape increased annually by an average of nearly 15 percent, which is faster than any other category of violent crime. Of the estimated 95,000 sex offenders in State prisons today, well over 60,000 most likely committed their crime against a child under age 17. Compounding this growing problem is the high rate of recidivism among sex offenders. A review of frequently cited studies of sex offender recidivism indicates that offenders who molest young girls repeat their crimes at rates up to 25 percent and offenders who molest young boys at rates up to 40 percent. Moreover the recidivism rates do not appreciably decline as offenders age. Another factor that makes these numbers disturbing is that many serious sex crimes are never reported to authorities. National data and criminal justice experts indicate that sex offenders are apprehended for a fraction of the crimes they commit. By some estimates, only one in every three to five serious sex offenses are reported to authorities, and only 3 percent of such crimes ever result in the apprehension of an offender. Studies confirm that a single child molester can abuse hundreds of children. It goes without saying that any attack is devastatingly tragic for the victim and will leave a scar that will be carried throughout life. Victims experience severe mental and physical health problems as a result of these crimes. These problems include increased rates of depression and suicide, as well as reproductive problems. The effect of sexual abuse resonates from victim to family and continues to weave through the fabric of our communities. Children have the right to grow up protected from sexual predators and free from abuse. H.R. 2146 will protect America's children by permanently removing the worst offenders from our society, those who repeatedly victimize children. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, we will be dealing with the issue of additional judicial manpower in the context of the conference on the Department of Justice authorization bill. But even before that passes, if we could get a few more confirmations, we would get more judges on the bench and more judicial work done.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I would encourage the gentlewoman from Texas to introduce her proposal as separate legislation. I am not sure that the Committee on the Judiciary has exclusive jurisdiction over that type of a study, and I certainly would not wish to preclude other committees of jurisdiction from looking at it.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and pending that, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my point of order, since the amendment is germane, and I rise in opposition to the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I cannot believe that the gentlewoman from Texas would draft an amendment of this nature and submit it to the committee for its consideration. It says, ``This act shall have no effect if there are more than five convicted child offenders within any given ZIP code.'' That means that if there are five child sex offenders who are convicted under this law and sent to the penitentiary for life, there are five people in the ZIP code where the penitentiary is located, and every future child sex offender would be able to run around the country in Federal areas and be able to continue preying on these children. Stop and think about how this amendment is drafted. It is drafted so that anyplace where there is a penitentiary that has five or more child sex offenders, it would end up taking away the effect of this law throughout the United States of America. This is a shameful amendment, and I hope it is overwhelmingly rejected.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kennedy).

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith), who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Green).