COMBATING DOMESTIC TERRORISM WEDNESDAY, MAY 3, 1995 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:06 a.m., in room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Bill McCollum (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Representatives Bill McCollum, Steven Schiff, Stephen E. Buyer, Howard Coble, Fred Heineman, Ed Bryant of Tennessee, Steve Chabot, Bob Barr, Charles E. Schumer, Robert C. Scott, Zoe Lofgren, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Melvin L. Watt. Also present: Representative Henry J. Hyde. Staff present: Paul J. McNully, chief counsel; Glenn R. Schmitt, counsel; Daniel J. Bryant, assistant counsel; Aerin D. Dunkle, research assistant, and Tom Diaz, minority counsel. OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN MCCOLLUM Mr. MCCOLLUM. This meeting of the Subcommittee on Crime will come to order. Today's hearing is going to have to conclude by 12:30 for reasons of the retreats of both the Republicans and the Democrats this weekend, and, consequently, we have three panels that we have to move through rather expeditiously. I'm going to keep a very short statement. I'm going to yield to my ranking Democrat, Mr. Schumer, and we hope that we don't have any other opening statements. I'm going to ask all witnesses to summarize their testimony, and let us move to what is an extremely important hearing at this point. Let me begin by saying that less than one month ago in this very room the members of this subcommittee participated in a full Judiciary Committee hearing on the issue of terrorism. We discussed the real potential of terrorism in the United States and the devastating consequences of such crime. We didn't know then that in a matter of days a peaceful and pleasant city in the heart of America would be forever scarred by ruthless acts of violence that we call terrorism. The number of lives claimed by the car bomb in Oklahoma City is so large it overwhelms us: over 140 deaths, with still many missing, many never to be truly accounted for because of the force of the blast. The extent of the suffering and the loss is incomprehensible. In the wake of this tragedy, there are those who would express skepticism about congressional hearings and legislation involving terrorism. They would dismiss such efforts as just politicians playing to the public sense of fear and vulnerability. Let me be very clear to those who hold such a view: government has an absolute duty to protect its citizens from terrorism and all other forms of violent crime. This chairman will not rest until he's assured that everything within our power is done to avoid the destruction we have witnessed in the past few weeks from ever happening again. We will not be able to stop all senseless acts of violence, no matter what we do, but I know for a fact that the dedicated men and women of law enforcement have, indeed, thwarted acts of terrorism in the past, and through the encouragement and assistance of this Congress, they will be able to prevent even more devastation in the future. That brings me to another point that I've been looking forward to making. In my view, and that of many of my colleagues, the FBI and Federal law enforcement in general, where appropriate, must pursue vigorously every opportunity to prevent terrorist activities in this country. Senior officials must press hard to get the authority they need to accomplish this goal. To be specific, again, this chairman without hesitation supports the use of lawful tools, including infiltration, to combat potential acts of terror by militia organizations or any other group that appears capable of violence like that committed in Oklahoma. Current investigative guidelines must be interpreted in this light. Moreover, it must be communicated down the line to agents in the field that the people's elected representatives stand behind their efforts. These men and women cannot be in the position of worrying about second-guessing and Monday morning quarterbacking by this Congress or by their superiors. They must aggressively use all legal means to accomplish their mission, and that's the key: all legal means. The steadfast support of this subcommittee is defined by the rule of law, the strict adherence to law enforcement by the Constitution and all relevant statutes. All of us in government have a moral duty to follow the laws of the land as we seek to insure that the public also obeys the law. To that end, this subcommittee must take seriously its oversight responsibility. We must not allow the backing of our Federal law enforcement officers to become an inducement for unlawful activity. Is this a delicate balance? Of course it is, but it is the substance of our responsibilities. In this vein, let me say that I intend to go forward with hearings on alleged abuses of Federal law enforcement powers as soon as practicable. Included will be one or more hearings on the events in Waco, TX, in 1993. In this regard, I'll soon be sending to the Department of Justice and Treasury requests for information on matters pertaining to the Waco incident. I submitted some of these requests in the last Congress, but did not receive adequate response, perhaps because of ongoing criminal prosecutions and other litigation. I hope at this point in time that those matters are cleared up so that we can have the data we need to proceed with these hearings. As soon as the subcommittee obtains from the administration the information it needs and completes its review of such informa tion, we will schedule hearings for this summer or sooner to take place at the earliest possible date on the Waco matter. But today our focus is not on oversight, but on determining whether law enforcement has the authority at the Federal level it needs to protect the public from the senseless and despicable crime that occurred last month. We will hear from our Nation's leading law enforcement officials, past and present. Again, we have a difficult job involving the balancing of vital interests. On the one hand, we must be careful to guard the heritage of treasured liberties with which Americans have been blessed. On the other hand, law enforcement must have adequate investigative and prosecutorial tools at its disposal or we will witness a repeat of Oklahoma City. For example, I'm very concerned that the FBI by unable to gain evidence through electronic surveillance because of sophisticated encryption technology used by terrorist organizations. This is one of many problems that must be addressed. I understand that. We have heard from you, Director Freeh, and we understand what you've said technically on things in the past, and we're looking forward to hearing again today from you. I look forward to all of the testimony before this committee today of you, Ms. Gorelick, and the other witnesses as well, and we will attempt, when that is accomplished, in this Judiciary Committee which Chairman Hyde, who has joined us this morning, chairsMr. Conyers is our ranking minority member. Mr. Schumer is my ranking minority member, and all the other members are going to be participating in the very near future to draft a proper and appropriate balanced counterterrorism bill. I now yield to my ranking minority member, Mr. Schumer of New York. Mr. SCHUMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, I want to commend your leadership in promptly convening this hearing. America has no business more urgent than ridding itself of the ugly scourge of terrorism,. You and I have worked together for years on fighting terrorism, and I respect your leadership in that fight. I look forward to working with you as we thoroughly examine the roots of terrorism. want to emphasize the words "thoroughly examine" because domestic terrorism is not just a single horrible event like the bombing at Oklahoma City. It is not just the cowardly, evil people, whoever they may be, who planned and carried out that heartless atrocity, and it is not just the vicious criminal acts they committed. Terrorism is a frightening political illness. It is an angry eruption of hatred, intolerance, and extremism. The bombing in Oklahoma City made clear that this illness is, unfortunately, in America a fact of life, and it will infect our society and could destroy our culture if we do not act. We must first understand domestic terrorism, and then we must ruthlessly cut it out of our body politic. This hearing is a good start. It will help us understand the sickness of domestic terrorism, but it is only a start. We must do more. We must understand much better the culture in which the illness of terrorism has thrived, the culture of militant paranoia that we have come to know as the militia movement. Some of these militias may be operating perfectly within the law; some very well may not be. We don't know, but we ought to find out because it's not just that some militias may be good and some militias may be bad. What I find troubling is the very concept of a band of private citizens organizing themselves, arming themselves with weapons of war, and then laying plans to go to war against the Government of all the people. Just who do these people think they are? They're certainly not the well-organized militia of the Constitution. Those were open, above-board State militias more like today's National Guard than the bands of secretive sandlot soldiers who today claim the name of militia. And just why should not the rest of us, the vast majority of the American people, Democrat and Republican, conservative and liberal, those of us who don't plan to take up arms against our own homeland, why should we not speak out against the paranoid virulence that these militias spew? So I ask you today, Mr. Chairman, particularly in light of the fact that you announced you're having hearings on Waco, to convene additional hearings to comprehensively and thoroughly explore the so-called militias. It seems to me most Americans would think the militias and their fellow travelers represent a greater threat, or potential greater threat, to them than the ATF, the FBI, and others, even if mistakes were made in those agencies. So let's invite these self-righteous people and their self-appointed generals up here. Let them lay out their views, their plans, and their organizations to the American people in the full light of day. I hope you will do that. In the meantime, I have a message to the extremists who populate the militia movement and their cheerleaders on the radical fringe of the pro-gun crowd: America and this Congress will not be bullied. America and this Congress will not be intimidated. We will not be frightened into rash action by the violent terrorism that your vituperative words have helped breed. We will instead, hopefully in a bipartisan way, be careful, rational, and balanced in what we do. We will do all that's necessary and no more than is necessary to stop terrorist violence, and at the end of the day we will have preserved the rights of all Americans, all the rights of all Americans, not just the imaginary rights proclaimed by a few paramilitary paranoids. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. MCCOLLUM. You're quite welcome. The gentleman from Illinois, my good committee chairman, Mr. Hyde. Mr. HYDE. I thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. On April 6 the full Judiciary Committee held a hearing on terrorism. At that time our focus was on the international aspects of the terrorist threat. Among the items discussed was the administration's omnibus counterterrorism bill. Many have criticized portions of that bill as being violative of cherished constitutional protections. Some even question the need for additional legislation to combat the statistically-declining terrorist threat. There were ques tions raised about our own vulnerability in this hearing room to terrorist attack. The pain of Oklahoma City should quite those voices of doubt. That bombing has reached the heart and the soul of America. Almost immediately hundreds of rescue workers from across the country voluntarily flocked to that city to provide many unselfish hands in rescue efforts. Hundreds of Americans gathered quietly near the Murrah Building trying to do their part, however they might, through prayers, deeds, or both. Americans throughout this land are expressing their sorrow and solidarity with the people of Oklahoma City in ways that are at once profound and meaningful. Many have sought to find an explanation for the cause of that awful act of cowardice, but there's really only one explanation for it: diabolical individuals intent on damaging society by hurting hundreds of innocent lives. The administration has now proposed additional measures to combat terrorism. We hear that law enforcement needs sweeping new investigative authority and needs $1.5 billion of additional funding for this purpose. We hear of some of our citizens who would be willing to forfeit their constitutionally-protected freedoms if it would help avoid any further evil such as that perpetrated in the Murrah Building. Sacrificing freedoms is not the answer. Battles are fought to secure freedoms, not to relinquish them. The Judiciary Committee will consider comprehensive legislation which I will introduce that is directed at combating terrorism from whatever source. Lest our people be concerned, strengthening our law enforcement capabilities in this regard does not require a restriction of our civil liberties and constitutional protections. We're quite capable of striking the delicate and necessary balance between our constitutional guarantees and the Government's need to secure the safety of its citizenry. The legislation will not work a forfeiture of our citizens' cherished liberties. It will honor the victims of Oklahoma City and will attempt to diminish the possibility of repeated terrorist attacks in the future. That legislation will include concepts from the administration's omnibus counterterrorism bill and from its recent additional proposals, but it will also take further steps in areas where terrorism can be more effectively confronted. My proposal may include some of the following additional provisions, depending upon the knowledge we gain from today's hearing and based on what we've learned from the committee's April 6 hearing and the bombing in Oklahoma: Prohibiting the murder and assault of all current and former Federal employees and providing the death penalty as punishment for such crimes. Requiring the placement of inert substances into various chemical compounds that can be converted to explosive uses. Requiring the placement of taggants in explosive devices and compounds to provide easier detection and tracing. Creating a terrorism reward fund for information leading to the arrest and conviction of individuals or groups engaged in crimes involving both domestic and international terrorism. Restricting the use, purchase, sale, and transfer of toxic substances and gases. |