![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.489583333333333in"
height="1.15625in"}**Legislative
Bulletin...........................................May 3, 2007**

> **Contents:**
>
> **H.R. 1592** --- Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of
> 2007

H.R. 1592 --- Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007
(*Conyers, D-MI*)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on May 3, 2007, under a likely closed rule.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.R. 1592 would make certain "hate crimes"
new federal offenses -- including crimes motivated by "sexual
orientation and gender identity" (not defined in the bill). The bill
would also create two new federal grant programs to assist state and
local governments in investigating and prosecuting hate crimes, and
require expanded data collection and reporting for hate crimes, among
other provisions. The specific provisions of the bill are as follows:

-   Defines "hate crime" as having the meaning in 28 U.S.C. 994 (within
    the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994; P.L.
    103-322):

> a crime in which the defendant intentionally selects a victim, or in
> the case of a property crime, the property that is the object of the
> crime, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion,
> national origin, ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation
> of any person.
>
> [Note]{.underline}: The terms sexual orientation, gender identity, and
> disability are not explicitly defined in the bill.

-   Authorizes the U.S. Attorney General (AG), at the request of any
    state, local, or tribal law enforcement agency, to provide
    technical, forensic, prosecutorial, or any other type of assistance
    in the investigation and prosecution of any violent felony that is
    motivated by "prejudice based on the actual or perceived race,
    color, religion, national origin, gender, ***sexual orientation,
    gender identity, or disability*** of the victim" **or** is a
    ***violation of any state, local, or tribal hate crime law.***
    (emphasis added)

> Thus, this provision provides federal assistance for any violent
> felony based on the federal definition of hate crimes, as well as any
> violation based on any one of the state hate crime definitions.
> Currently, 45 states and the District of Columbia have some variation
> of hate crimes laws (though only 32 state statutes include sexual
> orientation, 28 states include gender, and 32 states include
> disability).
>
> *Source:
> <http://www.adl.org/combating_hate/hatecrimes_qa/hatecrime_qa2.asp#4>.*

-   Requires the AG to give priority to crimes committed by offenders
    who have committed crimes in more than one state, and to rural
    jurisdictions that have "difficulty covering the extraordinary
    expenses" (not defined) relating to the investigation or prosecution
    of the hate crime.

-   **Creates new federal grant program.** Authorizes the AG to award
    federal grants to state, local, and Indian law enforcement agencies
    for "extraordinary expenses" (not defined) associated with the
    investigation and prosecution of hate crimes.

-   Requires the Office of Justice Programs (under the Department of
    Justice -- DoJ) to work closely with grantees to "ensure that the
    concerns and needs of all affected parties, including community
    groups and schools, colleges, and universities, are addressed
    through the local infrastructure developed under the grants."

-   Stipulates grant application requirements, including a statement
    from potential grantees on the "extraordinary purpose" (not defined)
    of the grant and a certification that the government entity lacks
    the resources to investigate or prosecute hate crimes. The AG is
    required to approve or deny the grant application within 30 business
    days of receipt of the application, and provide a report to Congress
    detailing all grant applications and awards. Authorizes \$10 million
    to be appropriated for FY 2008 and FY 2009.

-   **Creates new federal grant program.** Authorizes the Office of
    Justice Programs to award grants to state, local, and tribal
    governments for programs designed to combat hate crimes committed by
    juveniles -- including programs to train local law enforcement
    officers in "identifying, investigating, prosecuting, and preventing
    hate crimes." Authorizes ***such sums as may be necessary*** to be
    appropriated to carry out this provision. (emphasis added)

-   Authorizes such sums as may be necessary for FY 2008 -- FY2010 (to
    the Treasury Department and DoJ) to increase the number of personnel
    to prevent and respond to alleged violations of hate crimes (18
    U.S.C. 249), as expanded under this bill.

-   Makes certain hate crimes new federal offenses and subject to
    certain maximum prison sentences and fines:

    -   whoever causes or attempts to cause bodily injury to a person
        because of actual or perceived race, color, religion, or
        national origin, will be sentenced to a prison term of up to 10
        years, fined, or both; and

    -   if the offense results in death or includes kidnapping or
        attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to
        commit aggravated sexual abuse, or attempted murder, the
        offender may receive up to a life sentence in prison.

-   Makes certain hate crimes new federal offenses and subject to
    certain maximum prison sentences and fines ***in instances involving
    interstate commerce** (where the defendant has crossed a state or
    national border, or uses a weapon that has crossed such border, in
    conjunction with the offense)*:

    -   whoever causes or attempts to cause bodily injury to a person
        because of actual or perceived religion, national origin,
        gender, ***sexual orientation, gender identity or disability***,
        will be sentenced to a prison term of up to 10 years, fined, or
        both; and

    -   if the offense results in death or includes kidnapping or
        attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to
        commit aggravated sexual abuse, or attempted murder, the
        offender may receive up to a life-sentence in prison. (emphasis
        added)

-   Stipulates that no prosecution may be undertaken by the U.S. unless
    certified in writing by the AG or appropriate designee that:

a)  the certifying individual has reasonable cause to believe that bias
    (against one of the above mentioned categories) was a motivating
    factor underlying the conduct of the defendant; and

b)  state or local law enforcement officials have been consulted and
    determined that:

> 1\) the state does not have jurisdiction or does not intend to
> exercise jurisdiction,
>
> 2\) the state has requested that the federal government assume
> jurisdiction,
>
> 3\) the state does not object to the federal government assuming
> jurisdiction, ***or***
>
> 4\) the verdict or sentence obtained (based on the state charges)
> "***left demonstratively unvindicated the federal interest in
> eradicating bias-motivated violence***." (emphasis added)

-   ***Defines "gender identity" to mean "actual or perceived
    gender-related characteristics."*** The definition of "gender
    identity" includes the word "gender" and also states that the
    meaning could be "actual" or "perceived." As such, it is not clear
    from this "definition" what the bill authors intend for gender
    identity to mean or how it should be construed in law. (emphasis
    added)

-   States the following rule of evidence for court proceedings:

> In a prosecution for an offense under this section, evidence of
> expression or associations of the defendant may not be introduced as
> substantive evidence at trial, unless the evidence specifically
> relates to that offense. However, nothing in this section affects the
> rules of evidence governing impeachment of a witness.

-   Amends the Hate Crimes Statistics Act (28 U.S.C 534) to require the
    DoJ to collect hate crime statistics on "gender and gender
    identity," in addition to those categories reported under current
    law (race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, and ethnicity).
    Also requires the inclusion of data and statistics on crimes
    committed by, and directed against, juveniles (within the required
    annual report by the DoJ).

-   Includes a severability clause, stating that if one part or
    provision of the Act is found unconstitutional, the remaining
    provisions will not be affected:

> If any provision of this Act, an amendment made by this Act, or the
> application of such provision or amendment to any person or
> circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this
> Act, the amendments made by this Act, and the application of the
> provisions of such to any person or circumstance shall not be affected
> thereby.

-   States the following rule of construction (an amendment offered in
    committee by Rep. Davis, D-AL, and passed by a voice vote):

> Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, shall be
> construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal
> prohibition by, or any activities protected by the free speech or free
> exercise clauses of, the First Amendment to the Constitution.
>
> [Note]{.underline}: Since this disclaimer states the obvious, namely
> that the First Amendment is still in effect and that the bill does not
> prohibit "any activities protected by the free speech or free exercise
> clauses," the disclaimer has the appearance of strengthening free
> speech while not substantively providing any additional protections.
> Since this disclaimer does not expressly state any specific actions
> that would be protected under the First Amendment (i.e. -- publicly
> denouncing homosexual behavior as a sin or placing an advertisement
> that includes Biblical verses that condemn homosexual behavior on a
> public billboard), it has the net effect of paraphrasing the First
> Amendment and nothing more. As the Judiciary Committee Minority staff
> has noted, the Supreme Court has "already has decided that hate crimes
> laws are constitutional under the First Amendment, and upheld the
> criminal conviction of a person for "hate speech" when coupled with a
> violent act committed by other persons (*Wisconsin* v. *Mitchell*, 508
> U.S. 476 (1993))." Thus, religious leaders promoting traditional
> morality could be made subject to compulsory legal processes (and
> hauled into court) simply because their religious teachings may have
> been misconstrued by a deranged murderer.

-   Requires the U.S. Sentencing Commission to study the issue of adult
    recruitment of juveniles to commit hate crimes and report the
    findings to Congress within six months (an amendment offered by Rep.
    Jackson-Lee, D-TX, and passed by a voice vote).

The bill also states a number of findings, including the following:

-   "The incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived
    race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation,
    gender identity, or disability of the victim poses a ***serious
    national problem***. (emphasis added)

-   "State and local authorities are now and will continue to be
    responsible for prosecuting the overwhelming majority of violent
    crimes in the United States, including violent crimes motivated by
    bias. These authorities can carry out their responsibilities more
    effectively with greater Federal assistance.

-   "Existing Federal law is inadequate to address this problem.

-   "Such violence substantially affects interstate commerce in many
    ways, including the following:

a)  The movement of members of targeted groups is impeded, and members
    of such groups are forced to move across State lines to escape the
    incidence or risk of such violence.

b)  Members of targeted groups are prevented from purchasing goods and
    services, obtaining or sustaining employment, or participating in
    other commercial activity.

c)  Perpetrators cross State lines to commit such violence.

d)  Channels, facilities, and instrumentalities of interstate commerce
    are used to facilitate the commission of such violence.

e)  Such violence is committed using articles that have traveled in
    interstate commerce.

-   "Both at the time when the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the
    Constitution of the United States were adopted, and continuing to
    date, members of certain religious and national origin groups were
    and are perceived to be distinct 'races.' ***Thus, in order to
    eliminate, to the extent possible, the badges, incidents, and relics
    of slavery, it is necessary to prohibit assaults on the basis of
    real or perceived religions or national origins***, at least to the
    extent such religions or national origins were regarded as races at
    the time of the adoption of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to
    the Constitution of the United States. (emphasis added)

-   "Federal jurisdiction over certain violent crimes motivated by bias
    enables Federal, State, and local authorities to work together as
    partners in the investigation and prosecution of such crimes.

-   "The problem of crimes motivated by bias is sufficiently serious,
    widespread, and interstate in nature as to warrant Federal
    assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}:** Following a prolonged public
debate regarding "hate crimes" in the 1980s, and specifically focusing
on the question of whether incidents of violent crime motivated by
specific hate toward one group was on the rise or not, Congress passed
the Hate Crimes Statistics Act in 1990. This Act required the Attorney
General to collect data "about the crimes that manifest evidence of
prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity" for
certain violent crimes. Congress amended this law in 1994 to include
"disability" as well, and required the AG to publish data annually. The
AG tasked the FBI with compiling and publishing this information as part
of the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) program, and hate crime statistics
have been compiled, based on information voluntarily submitted by the
states, since 1991.

In 1994, Congress defined "hate crime" (see Summary for definition) and
required the U.S. Sentencing Commission to create guidelines to provide
sentencing enhancements for hate crimes. Since then, several other
federal laws have been enacted that relate to or expand federal hate
crime law, including the Violence Against Women Act and the Church Arson
Prevention Act. In addition, Congress provided funding for hate crimes
prevention in the 2001 passage of No Child Left Behind and has
appropriated funding to provide anti-hate crime training to state and
local law enforcement agencies.

During consideration of the Children\'s Safety Act of 2005 (H.R. 3132)
in the 109^th^ Congress, Rep. Conyers offered an amendment to this bill
adding the text of the "Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act
of 2005" (the precursor to H.R. 1592), which passed by a vote of [223 --
199](http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll469.xml). However, H.R. 3132
was not taken up by the Senate, and the House subsequently passed H.R.
4472, a revised version of the Children's Safety Act that did not
include the hate crimes amendment, which was signed in to law on July
27, 2006.

**[Possible Conservative Concerns]{.underline}:** As noted in the
Summary, sexual orientation and disability are not defined in the bill
or in current law. Gender identity is defined so vaguely as to have
little meaning. Within legislation that expands federal powers and
provides federal grant money to investigate and prosecute state and
local violent crimes, some conservatives may be concerned by the
nondescript bill language and terminology. Further, section 4 of the
bill explicitly provides federal grants to investigate and prosecute
***state or locally defined*** hate crimes, where there exists hundreds
of disparities and definitions.

For example, the state of Connecticut passed [hate crimes
legislation](http://www.cga.ct.gov/2004/act/Pa/2004PA-00135-R00HB-05657-PA.htm)
in 2004, which specifically codifies definitions of sexual orientation,
gender identity, and disability to include dozens of variant identities
and disorders defined by the American Psychiatric Association. In its
publication entitled *Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders*, "disabilities" such as autogynephilia, coprophilia,
necrophilia, pedophilia, transsexual, transvestite, zoophilia, and many
others are included as protected classes. As such, these same groups may
be covered by H.R. 1592. Thus, a violent crime against an individual
that is targeted because he is a transsexual or a necrophile (sexual
arousal or activity with a corpse) will be investigated, prosecuted, and
sentenced more harshly than an identical violent crime against a
pregnant woman or a police officer.

In addition, as noted above, those entities that have been subject to
prosecution and threats under state hate crime laws (typically religious
leaders promoting traditional morality) may be subject to potential
criminal liability under this bill, as prosecutors blur the line between
what constitutes a "hate crime" and what they *deem* hate speech (see
Free Speech section below).

**Example of free speech prosecuted under state hate crime laws:**

-   In Philadelphia, 11 Christians were arrested and jailed overnight in
    2004 for singing and preaching in a public park at a homosexual
    street festival. Five of them were bound over and charged with five
    felonies and three misdemeanors, totaling a possible 47 years in
    jail. These charges, based on Pennsylvania\'s \"hate crimes\" law,
    hung over them for months until a judge finally dismissed them.
    *(The Philadelphia Inquirer, February 13, 2005).*

> *See reports from [American Family
> Association](http://www.afa.net/clp/Philly4_011005.asp) and the [Human
> Rights
> Campaign](http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Section=Home&CONTENTID=33111&TEMPLATE=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm).*

-   In Canada, a newspaper publisher and a man who placed a newspaper ad
    faced jail and were fined \$4,500 each, merely for running an ad
    containing references to several Bible verses regarding
    homosexuality. *(WorldNetDaily, February 6, 2000).*

-   A pastor in New York saw his billboard with a Bible verse on it
    taken down under pressure from city officials, who cited \"hate
    crime\" rhetoric. *(The New York Post, March 12, 2000).*

-   The San Francisco Board of Supervisors officially approved a
    resolution urging local media to decline to run advertisements by
    pro-family groups that offered hope for change to homosexuals. A
    liberal court then winked at this egregious violation of the First
    Amendment. *(The San Francisco Examiner, October 20, 1998).*

> *Source:
> <http://www.cwfa.org/articledisplay.asp?id=2575&department=CFI&categoryid=papers>*

**Equal Justice:**

"Equal justice under law" is one of America's most firmly embedded legal
principles. In fact, these exact words are etched in the stone above the
main entrance to the U.S. Supreme Court building. The U.S. Declaration
of Independence begins with the words, "We hold these truths to be
self-evident, *that all men are created equal*, that they are endowed by
their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." The Fourteenth Amendment
contains the "Equal Protection Clause" which provides that "no state
shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection
of the laws."

Some conservatives may be concerned that any expansion of "hate crimes"
would erode the equal justice principle and its practice in U.S.
courtrooms -- since violent crimes deemed motivated by the specific type
of hatred defined in this bill would merit additional federal penalties
and significantly more federal involvement and resources in
investigating and prosecuting these crimes. The degree of justice
served, and corresponding punishment for criminals, will depend on
whether the victim is within one of the protected groups under this
bill. Two identical violent crimes of murder -- one a "random" act of
violence and another "hate- motivated" act of violence -- will be
provided unequal treatment and unequal punishment.

Many homosexual advocacy groups assert that their mission is to provide
equal justice to their members and associates (lesbians, gays,
bisexuals, transgenders, etc.). Human Rights Campaign's (HRC) motto is
"Working for LGBT Equal Rights" and the Gay & Lesbian Advocates and
Defender's (GLAD) motto is "equal justice under law." However, both
organizations support passage of H.R. 1592, which would codify separate
and distinct treatment for the very same violent crime, and provide
additional federal resources, funding, and assistance for a hate crime
over another "random" violent crime.

**Federalism:**

The principle of federalism states that power not expressly provided to
the federal government by the U.S. Constitution are reserved for the
states. The Tenth Amendment states, "The powers not delegated to the
United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States,
are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." As noted
above, this bill would expand the federal government's involvement in,
and provide significant federal resources for, crimes otherwise under
the jurisdiction of state and local governments. More specifically, the
bill's provisions would federalize each and every state and local crime,
so long as there exists the possibility that the crime was motivated by
"hate," as defined under this bill. Some conservatives may be concerned
by this significant federal encroachment of state laws and prerogatives.

**Free Speech & Religious Liberties:**

The First Amendment establishes that Congress "shall make no law...
abridging the freedom of speech....". The nature of "hate crime"
legislation is to require law enforcement officials to try to ascertain
the specific thoughts and motivations that a perpetrator may have had
while committing a violent crime, in order to stiffen the penalty for
the underlying offense. Current federal law allows an individual to be
prosecuted as an "accessory" to a crime, or if the individual somehow
"incited" violence. Thus, if an individual (such as a pastor or rabbi)
denounced the act of homosexuality as a sin to a group of people, and
one of those people committed a violent crime against a homosexual, it
is plausible that the pastor or rabbi could be charged with inciting
violence or as an accessory to the crime. State hate crime laws have
been used in several instances to harass, arrest, and/or silence
non-violent protests, public broadcasts and media events and displays,
and other instances where individuals were lawfully exercising protected
First Amendment free speech privileges. Some conservatives may be
concerned that empowering the federal government, and disparate state
and local governments via new federal grants, to pursue "hate crimes"
may have the effect of silencing or restricting free speech. It is
perceived by many conservatives that the "[LBJ
amendment](http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/072802/met_10031144.html)"
(regarding IRS regulations prohibiting political candidate endorsements
by non-profits) has had the net effect of squelching free speech in
churches and synagogues across the country since 1954. Notably, the only
ramification that comes from not adhering to the LBJ Amendment is that a
non-profit would potentially lose their 501(c)(3) tax status, not the
potential criminal liability and prosecution that is allowed under this
legislation.

**[Amendments]{.underline}:** The House Rules Committee under Chairman
Louise Slaughter passed a closed rule for H.R. 1592, not allowing any
amendments, despite the fact that the Judiciary Committee mark-up lasted
over 10 hours and numerous Members of Congress expressed their desire to
offer amendments on the House Floor.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}:** H.R. 1592 was introduced on March
20, 2007, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary's Subcommittee
on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. The bill was marked-up on
April 25, and it was reported (amended) to the House by a vote of 21-17
the same day.

The following Republican amendments were defeated in the Judiciary
Committee markup, largely along party-line votes:

-   [Pence]{.underline} -- an amendment to clarify that religious
    freedom is not affected. *Failed 15-20*

-   [Jordan]{.underline} -- an amendment to add the unborn subject to
    the partial birth procedure to the list of protected classes. *Ruled
    non-germane*

-   [Gohmert]{.underline} -- an amendment to add "random acts of
    violence" to the list of protected classes. *Ruled non-germane*

-   [Forbes]{.underline} -- an amendment to add "members of the armed
    forces" to the list of protected classes. *Failed 12-16*

-   [Franks]{.underline} -- an amendment to bar prosecution for actions
    protected under the First Amendment. *Failed on voice vote*

-   [Feeney]{.underline} -- an amendment requiring that the conduct
    substantially affect interstate or foreign commerce. *Failed 12-19*

-   [Gohmert]{.underline} -- an amendment to strike "sexual orientation"
    and "gender identity" from the bill. *Failed 13-18*

-   [Goodlatte]{.underline} -- an amendment to add senior citizens as a
    protected class under the bill. *Failed 12-16*

-   [Goodlatte]{.underline} -- an amendment to add pregnant women as a
    protected class under the bill. *Failed 15-16*

-   [Chabot]{.underline} -- an amendment to add witnesses in a judicial
    proceeding as a protected class under the bill. *Failed 15-20*

-   [Chabot]{.underline} -- an amendment to add a victim of a prior
    crime as a protected class under the bill. *Failed 15-20*

-   [Issa]{.underline} -- an amendment to add an additional bias to the
    bill -- "or any other animus towards that person." *Failed on voice
    vote*

-   [Issa]{.underline} -- an amendment to define a person to exclude the
    unborn. F*ailed 0-33 with 3 passing*

-   [Gohmert]{.underline} -- an amendment to clarify the earlier Davis
    amendment to specifically include religious expression. *Failed
    16-20*

-   [Forbes]{.underline} -- an amendment to add children under the age
    of 18 as a protected class under the bill. *Failed 16-21*

-   [King]{.underline} -- an amendment to strike the term "gender" and
    replace with "sex." *Failed 15-20*

-   [King]{.underline} -- an amendment to change title of bill to "Local
    Law Assistance Thought Crime Prevention Act." *Failed 13-21*

-   [Gohmert]{.underline} -- an amendment to add police/law enforcement
    as a protected class under the bill. *Failed on a voice vote*

-   [Gohmert]{.underline} -- an amendment to add the death penalty for
    hate crimes under the bill. *Failed on voice vote*

[**Administration Policy**:]{.underline} A Statement of Administration
Policy was unavailable at the time of publication.

**[Outside Organizations Opposing]{.underline}**: Hate crimes
legislation is being [opposed]{.underline} by a variety of conservative
and pro-family organizations, including, but not limited to:

-   [AdvanceUSA](http://www.advanceusa.org/)

-   [Christian Coalition](http://www.cc.org/) \*

-   [Eagle Forum](http://www.eagleforum.org/alert/2007/04-23-07.html) \*

-   [Family Research Council](http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?c=HOME) \*

-   [Traditional Values Coalition](http://www.traditionalvalues.org/) \*

> *\* Including the vote in annual Congressional Scorecard*

**[Outside Organizations Supporting]{.underline}**: Hate crimes
legislation is being [supported]{.underline} by a variety of liberal
organizations, including, but not limited to:

-   [Anti-Defamation League](http://www.adl.org/combating_hate/)

-   [Gay & Lesbians Advocates and Defenders
    (GLAD)](http://www.glad.org/rights/violence.shtml)

-   [Human Rights Campaign](http://www.hrc.org/)

-   [National Organization for
    Women](http://www.capwiz.com/now/issues/alert/?alertid=9679936&type=CO)

-   [People for the American
    Way](http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=23783)

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}:** According to CBO, H.R. 1592 will
authorize \$10 million in FY08, and at least \$20 million over the
FY08-FY12 period.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}:** Yes. As noted above, this bill creates two
new federal grant programs, and expands the definition of hate crimes in
federal law. In addition, the bill would make certain hate crimes new
federal offenses, including crimes motivated by "sexual orientation and
gender identity." Thus, as the Judiciary Committee minority staff has
noted, this bill would federalize each and every state and local crime
that has the potential of being a hate crime under federal or state law.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}:** No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}:** A committee report citing
constitutional authority is unavailable.

House Rule XIII, Section 3(d)(1), requires that all committee reports
contain "a statement citing the *specific* powers granted to Congress in
the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint
resolution." *\[emphasis added\]*

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}:** Derek V. Baker;
[derek.baker@mail.house.gov](mailto:Derek.baker@mail.house.gov);
202-226-8585

\###