Passport Issuance: Current Situation Results in Thousands of Passports Issued to Registered Sex Offenders
Published: 2010-06-15T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: A U.S. passport allows the owner to travel freely both in and out of the country. Although passport recipients typically travel internationally for business or leisure, some passport recipients are using their passports to commit nefarious illegal activities outside this country. Specifically, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has documented cases of U.S. passport holders engaging in sex acts with children in foreign countries. Federal statutes authorize the Secretary of State to deny issuance of a passport in certain circumstances, such as for a conviction for international drug trafficking or arrearages in child support. GAO was asked to (1) determine, to the extent possible, the number of passport recipients who are registered sex offenders and (2) develop case study examples of passport recipients who are registered sex offenders. To do so, GAO compared fiscal year 2008 passport data from the Department of State (State) to data in DOJ's National Sex Offender Registry (NSOR). GAO also interviewed State officials. GAO selected 30 sex offenders, primarily based on geography, and performed investigations. In response to a draft of this report, DOJ had no comments. State expressed concerns about the presentation of some findings. State's comments are addressed within the report.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: State issued U.S. passports to thousands of registered sex offenders during fiscal year 2008. Currently, State has no statutory authority to deny passports to registered sex offenders, except those convicted of sex tourism. GAO's analysis of data provided by State and DOJ indicates that of over 16 million U.S. passports issued in 2008, about 4,500 were issued to registered sex offenders. This estimate is likely to be understated because of data limitations in the passport and NSOR databases. From analysis of the NSOR, GAO also found that about 50 of these registered sex offenders either lived outside of the United States or the offender's whereabouts were not known. GAO also found that at least 30 of these registered sex offenders were federal employees during fiscal year 2008. GAO judgmentally selected 30 sex offenders for investigation. At the time of the criminal offense, many of these offenders held positions of public trust, such as health care provider, school teacher, religious layman, law enforcement official, National Aeronautics and Space Administration engineer, and owner of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Section 8 program single-family houses. GAO's investigation also found that State issued passports to individuals who were residing in prison or delinquent in child support or whose whereabouts were unknown according to the NSOR. Finally, GAO's investigation found that one individual has illegally failed to register with the police department as a sex offender for several years.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: In fiscal year 2008, the Department of State (State) issued over 16 million  passports to U.S. citizens. Passport recipients typically travel  internationally to conduct business or enjoy new cultures and scenery. But  some are using their passports to commit nefarious illegal activities  outside the country. Specifically, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has  documented cases of U.S. citizens engaging in sex acts with children in  foreign countries. Several criminal cases highlight the issue: In 2009, a serial sex offender who had failed to register as a sex offender  was convicted of traveling to Germany to have sex with a 14-year-old boy  who was living in an orphanage. He cultivated a friendship with the victim  and while on a bike trip, the victim woke to find the offender fondling him.  The offender was also separately convicted of failing to comply with sex  offender registration requirements.  In 2008, a registered sex offender from Arizona was sentenced to more  than 9 years in prison after he pled guilty to engaging in sexual activity  with teenage girls in Mexico. The Mexican police found the offender in his  Mexican apartment with a 15-year-old Texas girl, who later told authorities  she engaged in sexual conduct with the offender in exchange for money  and crack cocaine. The offender also paid $40 for sex to other underage  girls in a Mexican bar.  In 2005, a registered sex offender from Maryland was sentenced to 15  years in prison followed by supervised release for life after he pled guilty  to sexually molesting young boys in the Philippines and Cambodia. The  offender was previously convicted of three separate child sex crimes in  Maryland and was released on parole in 2000 after serving 13 years of an  18-year sentence.
Federal statutes authorize the Secretary of State to deny issuance of a  passport in certain circumstances, such as while an individual is  imprisoned or on parole or supervised release for a conviction for  international drug trafficking or sex tourism or is in arrearages for child  support. However, there is currently no comprehensive program to deny  passports to applicants who are registered sex offenders. In response to  your request, we (1) determined the number of passport recipients who  are registered sex offenders and (2) developed and substantiated case  studies of passport recipients who are registered sex offenders.
To determine the number of passport recipients who are registered sex  offenders, we used State’s passport database of all individuals who were  issued a passport in fiscal year 2008. We compared the database to DOJ’s  National Sex Offender Registry (NSOR) as of December 2008 to determine  the number of fiscal year 2008 passport recipients who were registered sex  offenders. To develop case studies, we judgmentally selected 30 cases  primarily based on geography and considered other factors, such as  severity of crime. We researched and analyzed court records, police  reports, and other investigative sources. Our investigators also interviewed  certain passport recipients from our case studies. While these case studies  cannot be generalized beyond the cases reviewed, they serve to illustrate  the types of sex offenders that were issued passports in fiscal year 2008.
To determine the reliability of the passport data, we interviewed State  officials responsible for those databases about the quality of the data. In  addition, we performed electronic testing of the passport database and the  NSOR to determine the validity of specific data elements that we used to  perform our work. Based on our discussions with agency officials and our  own testing, we concluded that the data used for this report were  sufficiently reliable for our purposes.
We conducted this forensic audit from October 2009 to June 2010 in  accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those  standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient,  appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and  conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence  obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions  based on our audit objectives. We conducted our related investigative  work in accordance with standards prescribed by the Council of the  Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency.
subsections: section_title: Background
subsections: section_title: The National Sex Offender Registry
paragraphs: All states, the District of Columbia, U.S. territories, and some Indian tribes  have laws or codes requiring convicted sex offenders to register with local  or state law enforcement authorities to enhance public protection and  provide an additional investigative tool to law enforcement agencies. In  most states, the sex offender registry is centrally maintained by a state  criminal justice agency, such as the state police or a department of public  safety.
The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (Walsh Act)   requires states to submit sex offender registrant information to the  Attorney General for inclusion in a national registry. The Federal Bureau  of Investigation (FBI) maintains this database, the NSOR. In addition, the  Walsh Act established a comprehensive set of minimum standards for  states to follow for reporting sex offenders, including who must register,  what information must be in the registries, how often registrants must  reappear in person to verify their registration information and be  rephotographed, the number of years that offenders must maintain their  registration, and guidelines for the penalties for failing to register.
Convicted sex offenders who fail to satisfy registration requirements are  subject to state or federal prosecution. The Walsh Act requires states to  impose criminal penalties (including a maximum potential prison term of  more than 1 year) on sex offenders who fail to comply with registration  requirements. In addition, the Walsh Act makes failure to comply with  registration requirements a federal crime (punishable by up to 10 years in  prison) for sex offenders who travel between states or Indian tribal  jurisdictions, or whose offenses are for federal, District of Columbia ,  Indian, or territorial crimes.
section_title: Restrictions on Issuance of U.S. Passports
paragraphs: Although federal law permits certain restrictions on the issuance of  passports to individuals, the Secretary of State is not authorized to restrict  the issuance of passports to individuals because they are listed in the  NSOR. As with any other convicted felon, State lacks the authority to  identify such status on these individuals’ passports. Federal law permits  the Secretary of State to deny or revoke the issuance of passports only in  certain circumstances, including, but not limited to, when the individual  is subject to a criminal court order, condition of probation, or condition of  parole, any of which forbids departure from the United States and the  violation of which could result in the issuance of a federal warrant of  arrest, including a warrant issued under the Federal Fugitive Felon Act;  is over $2,500 delinquent in child support;  is delinquent in certain State debts;    has an outstanding felony warrant;    has an outstanding foreign felony warrant;  is subject to an extradition request that has been presented to a foreign  country;    has been declared legally incompetent;    used a passport or crossed an international border to commit an act based  on which the individual was subsequently convicted of certain drug  trafficking crimes, but only during the period the individual is imprisoned  or on parole or supervised release; or    used a passport or crossed an international border to commit an act based  on which the individual was subsequently convicted under the federal “sex  tourism” statute, but only during the period the individual is imprisoned or  on parole or supervised release.
section_title: The Department of State Issued Thousands of Passports to Registered Sex Offenders in Fiscal Year 2008
paragraphs: About 4,500 registered sex offenders were issued a passport in fiscal year  2008. However, this number is likely understated because many of the  records in the passport database and the NSOR lacked valid Social  Security numbers, the key field that we used to match these two  databases. In addition, the NSOR does not currently contain a  comprehensive listing of all sex offenders from the states. As such, we  believe that the 4,500 registered sex offenders is the lowest approximation  of registered sex offenders who were issued passports in fiscal year 2008.
According to the NSOR, about half of these passport recipients lived in  five states—California, Texas, Florida, New York, and Michigan. The  reasons for this large concentration in these five states include that they  have large populations, border or are close to foreign countries, and may  provide a more comprehensive reporting of sex offenders to the NSOR.  The NSOR data also indicated that about 50 registered sex offenders who  were issued passports either lived outside of the United States or their  whereabouts were unknown. (See table 1.)
In addition, we identified at least 30 federal employees who were  registered sex offenders and were issued passports by matching our data  with federal civilian salary data from the Department of the Treasury, the  U.S. Postal Service, and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service.  Further, at least 12 individuals were landlords in the Department of  Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Section 8 housing program  during fiscal years 2006 and 2007 while they were registered sex  offenders.
As discussed earlier, although federal law permits certain restrictions on  the issuance of passports to individuals, the Secretary of State is not  authorized to restrict the issuance of passports to individuals who are  listed in the NSOR or to identify such individuals on their passports. State  has indicated that it would like to study any proposed legislation to  provide additional authority to deny passports to sex offenders, including  constitutional, policy, and practical issues that may arise in its application  and use. A State official said that the department recently began working  with DOJ to develop a procedure for tracking these convictions and a  procedure to notify State of those convictions. The official also said that  once the agency has worked out these procedures, it will amend the  regulations accordingly.
section_title: Case Studies Highlight Registered Sex Offenders Who Were Issued Passports despite Other Criminal Convictions or Who Fled the United States
paragraphs: The 30 registered sex offenders investigated for this report were all males  who represented a wide array of professions and criminal backgrounds. At  the time of their criminal offenses, many of them held positions of public  trust—for example, health care provider, school teacher, religious layman,  law enforcement official, federal employee, and owner of HUD Section 8  houses. Other cases involve registered sex offenders who owe child  support or are currently in prison or whose whereabouts are unknown  according to the NSOR. In one case study, the sex offender was issued a  passport in his name while in prison, which is allowed under federal law,  while another was issued a passport after becoming delinquent in child  support, an offense for which State must deny passports. Based on  interviews with local police departments, several of our cases showed that  sex offenders left the country and moved to Mexico. According to State  officials, Mexico does not have a sex offense registration system, so these  offenders are likely unknown to authorities and their neighbors. The  officials also stated that Mexico is one of the destinations known for sex  tourism. Finally, another individual has illegally failed to register with the  police department as a sex offender for several years.
Table 2 highlights 15 cases of registered sex offenders who were issued  their U.S. passports after their initial offenses. Appendix I provides details  on the other 15 cases we examined.
section_title: Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to DOJ and State for comment. DOJ  stated that it did not have comments on the report. State’s comments are  reprinted in appendix II, and its technical comments were incorporated as  appropriate.
In its written response to our report, State said that our report and its title  are misleading because they do not mention the low percentage of  passports that were issued to registered sex offenders. Although we made  a slight modification to the title to address State’s concern, we believe that  our report and its title are fair and factually accurate. About 4,500  registered sex offenders were issued a passport in fiscal year 2008.  Further, this number is likely understated because many of the records in  State’s passport database and the NSOR lacked valid Social Security  numbers, the key field that we used to match these two databases.
In addition, State said that we should make clear that we did not find  evidence that it failed to exercise its authority to deny a passport to any  sex offender identified in this study. However, we clearly explain that  State is not authorized to restrict the issuance of passports to individuals  because they are listed in the NSOR. State also said that we should include  other relevant data, such as the number of convictions by DOJ under the  relevant sex tourism statute and whether the passport could have been  denied based on a sex tourism conviction. However, while the federal  statute criminalizing sex tourism was in effect during the time period of  our data (October 1, 2007, through September 30, 2008), the statute that  requires State to deny passports to those convicted under that law did not  go into effect until after this time period elapsed (December 23, 2008).  Furthermore, it is our understanding that State recently began reviewing  the statute that requires passports to be denied to these individuals in  April 2010, after we brought this statute to its attention because State was  not aware of the statute.
State also wrote that our report suggested that the issuance of passports to  certain Americans facilitated their commission of sex offenses abroad,  adding that there was no evidence connecting the sex offenders to sex  crimes overseas following their convictions. We disagree. In our report, we  did not state that the issuance of passports to sex offenders in fiscal year  2008 facilitated their commission of sex offenses abroad. This was not part  of our objectives for this review.  However, our introduction does cite  examples from DOJ in which prior sex offenders committed sex crimes  overseas. Our investigation did find several cases where the passport  recipients traveled to locations known for sex tourism, and one of our 30  cases is currently under indictment related to sex crimes overseas.
State also said that there was no logical connection between the issuance  of passports and sex offenders’ travel to Mexico, adding that our evidence  was based on hearsay information and that a passport was not required to  enter the United States from Mexico (via land border) until June 2009. In  our report, we state that convicted sex offenders are required to register  with local or state law enforcement authorities. As part of this  requirement, the pertinent police departments stated that the offenders  informed them of their moving to Mexico.
Finally, State wrote that our report provides graphic details that were used  to suggest that State knew these details at the time of passport issuance  and should have taken action to prevent the issuance of the passport.  State’s assessment of the details of our case studies as “graphic” is the  result of the nature of the criminal acts of the passport recipients; the  offenses are directly relevant to our objective to develop case studies of  passport recipients who are sex offenders. In addition, State said that the  details of two of our cases in the Highlights could be construed as  indicating an “anti-gay” bias. However, the descriptions of these case  studies are at the same level of detail that we report in other case studies,  describing illegal activities between an adult and a child of either gender.  Furthermore, because these case studies only discuss sexual abuse of  children, we have not made any assumptions or implications regarding the  sexual orientations of these individuals. We do not believe the public  would condone such illegal activities, regardless of the genders of the sex  offenders or their victims.
As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents of  this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the  report date. At that time, we will send copies to interested congressional  committees, the Secretary of State, and the Attorney General. The report  also will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at  http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff members have any questions about this report, please  contact me at (202) 512-6722 or kutzg@gao.gov. Contact points for our  Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the   last page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this  report are listed in appendix III.
section_title: Appendix I: Additional Examples of Registered Sex Offenders Who Were Issued U.S. Passports
subsections: section_title: Passport issuance date
paragraphs: As of fiscal year 2009, the offender was a federal employee with an entity that  manages a national historical landmark.
In the mid-1990s, the offender was convicted of committing a lewd or lascivious act  with child under 14 years old.
The offender is currently incarcerated.
In the early 2000s, the offender was convicted of indecency with child, including  sexual contact.
According to the victim’s statement to the police, the offender restrained and had  sexual activity with her. The victim was an 8-year-old girl.
The offender has multiple parole violations and in the mid- to late 2000s, failed to  comply with sex offender registration requirements, evaded arrest with a vehicle,  and assaulted a public servant.
At the time of the offense, the offender was a practicing physician assistant.
In late 1990s, the offender was convicted of sexual battery.
The offender used his position as a physician assistant to seduce, sexually abuse,  and have sexual relations with multiple patients in violation of the doctor-patient  trust.
In the early 2000s, the offender was convicted of misdemeanor sexual abuse of a  child.
The offender was volunteering as an usher for a church and inappropriately  touched a 14-year-old boy while the boy was using a urinal.
At the time of the offense, the offender was a licensed physician.
The police reported that at the time of the arrest, the offender was a sworn sheriff’s  deputy and was near completing training at a corrections officer academy.
In the late 2000s, the offender was convicted of taking indecent liberties with  children.
According to police, the offender attempted to meet someone he believed was a  13-year-old girl for sexual relations on two separate occasions. The case was  initiated by an undercover operation targeting adults who were trying to exploit  children on the Internet.
At the time of the offense, the offender was employed with the Department of the  Treasury (Treasury). Although the position was one of “public trust,” Treasury was  aware of the conviction and has maintained his employment at the Bureau of  Engraving and Printing.
In the mid-1990s, the offender was convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a  child.
According to police reports, the offender had sex multiple times with the 7-year-old  daughter of his girlfriend.
The offender regularly traveled to Caribbean islands and Mexico after receiving his  passport.
In the late 1990s, the offender was convicted of sexual contact with a minor while  traveling on an airplane.
According to the prosecutor, the offender sexually assaulted an 11-year-old girl  while intoxicated and traveling on an airplane.
The offender traveled to Mexico after receiving his passport.
At the time of the offense, the offender was a practicing physician. The offender  lost his medical license for several years after his conviction for child pornography.
In the early 2000s, the offender was convicted of possession of child pornography.
The offender knowingly and intentionally possessed three discs containing images  of child pornography and responded to a solicitation—by the state police in a sting  operation—to purchase additional pornographic images involving teens and  preteens.
After his license was reinstated, the offender began practicing medicine in a  practice specializing in providing home visits to adult patients.
The offender traveled to a Caribbean island after receiving his passport.
The offender was employed at a company that constructs toilet partitions and  restroom compartments.
In the early 2000s, the offender was convicted of indecency with a child, including  exposure.
The offender exposed himself to a 10-year-old child and mother in the parking lot of  a sporting goods store.
The offender has a prior conviction for indecent exposure for sexually exposing  himself, driving his vehicle without pants, and masturbating at a red light.
The offender stated that he needed the passport for a business trip to Europe but  that the trip was subsequently canceled. He does not expect to use the passport in  the future.
In the mid-1990s, the offender was convicted of felony sodomy of a 9-year-old girl  and misdemeanor assault.
The offender traveled to the Caribbean after receiving his passport.
At the time of the offense, the offender was a licensed physician assistant.
In the early 2000s, the offender was convicted of attempted sexual abuse of a  child, a felony.
The offender attempted to rape a child with special needs while the child was  sleeping.
At the time of the offense, the offender was employed as an aerospace engineer  for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and is currently employed  with the agency. The agency does not require a security clearance for this position.
In the early 2000s, the offender was convicted of indecency with a child, including  sexual contact.
According to the police report, the offender molested his 15-year-old stepdaughter  by fondling, kissing, and touching the victim approximately 20 times in the span of  about 9 months.
The offender stated that he used the passport to travel to Japan for business.
At the time of the offense, the offender was a religious layman employed as a  teacher at a Catholic school and lured a 15-year-old boy into a storage room and  fondled him.
According to the police report, after the offense, the offender stalked the victim  repeatedly in the school hallways and bathroom. In the bathroom, the offender  engaged in inappropriate sexual contact.
In the late 2000s, the offender was convicted of child abuse that he committed in  the late 1970s.
At the time of the offense, the offender was a U.S. Postal Service employee. The  offender was still employed by the Postal Service as of fiscal year 2008.
In the mid-1990s, the offender was convicted of aggravated incest and sexual  assault of a child.
In the early 2000s, the offender was convicted of assault with intent to commit  rape, sodomy, or oral copulation.
The offender was also convicted of contributing to the delinquency of a minor in  early 1970s. According to the police report, the offender offered a car ride to a 13- year-old girl as she walked home from school. The victim jumped out of the  offender’s moving car after the offender exposed himself while driving.
In an interview with police, the offender stated that he was receiving psychiatric  treatment before the offense and admitted that he exposed himself to five or six  unknown females in a 3-year span.
According to local authorities, the offender has moved to Mexico.
The offender frequently crossed the Mexican border by vehicle after receiving his  passport.
section_title: Appendix II: Comments from the Department of State
paragraphs: Department of State Comments on GAO Draft Report  DEPARTMENT OF STATE: Passports Issued to Thousands of  (GAO-10-643, GAO Code 192298)
Thank you for giving the Department of State the opportunity to comment on the  draft report to the Senate Committee on Finance concerning the issuance of  passports to persons registered as sex offenders.  Please find our general  comments and concerns set forth below.  Our technical comments with requested  changes to the text are provided separately.
We think the report is very misleading.  Starting with the title, “Passports Issued to  Thousands of Registered Sex Offenders,” we are concerned that it conveys more  “shock value” than factual accuracy.  The fact is that the State Department lacks  legal authority to deny a passport to a registered sex offender and the title of the  report should reflect this.  Furthermore, of the over 16 million passport books and  cards issued in 2008, less than 0.0003 percent were issued to registered sex  offenders according to GAO estimates.  Additionally, the title fails to reveal the  very low percentage of passports that were issued to registered sex offenders in  2008 and the use of the word “thousands” without a reference point implies  otherwise.  Moreover, the title fails to convey that GAO found no lawful reasons  for the Department to deny or revoke the passports of the case study sex offenders  based on their status as sex offenders.
The title also fails to convey that GAO found no evidence that the offenders used  their passports to commit sex offenses abroad.  To be accurate and balanced, the  title should read:  “Existing U.S. Law Allows Passports to Be Issued to Registered  Sex Offenders, Although GAO Found No Evidence That Sex Offenders Used  Their Passports to Travel Abroad to Commit Sex Offenses.”
The Secretary of State has responsibility for issuing passports to U.S. nationals and  may only deny an application for a passport if there is a legal basis for denial.  The  Department takes this responsibility very seriously.  To that end, trained  adjudicators review each passport application and supporting documentation  extremely carefully to determine if the individual is entitled to a passport.  In most  cases, U.S. citizens are entitled to receive a passport regardless of the fact that they  previously committed or were convicted of a crime.
The Department does have legal authority to deny passports in certain  circumstances, including limited authority to deny in cases involving sex  offenders.  As noted in the draft report, Congress has already provided the  Department authority to deny passports to individuals convicted of the crime of sex  tourism involving minors and who used their passport or passport card or  otherwise crossed an international border in committing an offense.  The  Department is currently working with the Department of Justice (DOJ) to  implement this legislation.  The Department also has authority to deny passports to  individuals for whom an order of probation or parole as been entered by a court  forbidding departure from the United States.  When such orders are entered for sex  offenders, the Department has authority to deny their passports on that basis.
To be accurate and fair, the draft report should make clear that GAO found no  evidence that the Department failed to exercise its authority to deny a passport to  any sex offender identified in this study.  It should also include data relevant to this  issue, such as the number of convictions by DOJ in fiscal year 2008 under the  relevant sex tourism statute, and the number of those convicted who already had  valid passports at the time they committed these crimes.  The case studies  themselves could explain whether there is any evidence that the passport could  have been denied based on a sex tourism conviction, whether the criminal courts  failed to enter orders of probation/parole for the applicants forbidding departure  from the United States, or whether such orders had expired prior to passport  issuance.
The report appears to suggest, without any foundation, that the Department’s  issuance of passports to certain Americans facilitated their commission of sex  offenses abroad.  There are no facts in the report which show that any of the thirty  individuals included in the case studies used his passport to travel to a foreign  country to commit a sex crime.  Rather, it appears that most (if not all) the  individuals included in the case studies committed sex crimes either within their  own state or after traveling to a neighboring state.  There also is no evidence  connecting the sex offender to sex crimes overseas following their convictions.
Moreover, there is no logical connection between the Department’s issuance of  passports and the case studies involving travel to Mexico.  First, there is little  factual data in the report (beyond mere hearsay) that supports the conclusion that  any of the sex offenders in the case studies actually moved to Mexico.  But even if  they did, the report fails to explain that a passport was (and is) not necessary for  U.S. citizens to enter Mexico, and was not required to enter the United States from  Mexico via the land border until June 1, 2009.
Ultimately, the Department would want to study any legislative proposal to  prohibit issuance of passports to sex offenders beyond our existing authorities.   As  noted above, we currently have limited authority to deny passports to certain sex  offenders.  To the extent that this report is prepared for those considering such  legislation, the report should provide a more detailed discussion of the FBI’s sex  offender data and the limitations that data provides generally and with respect to  this study.  The Department’s understanding is that such data is derived from  individual state reporting and that there may be concerns, even by the Department  of Justice, with respect to its accuracy.  Each state may choose which offenses to  report on, and report on a range of sex offenses.  The nature of those offenses, e.g.,  the elements and penalties, and the reporting requirements differ from state to  state.  Moreover, as we understand it, the GAO only ran State Department passport  data against the social security numbers included in the database and did not  attempt to determine which offenses or which range of sex offenses the matched  individuals committed.  Data on the nature of the offenses committed by the  matched individuals could be useful in determining whether legislation is needed.
Including such detail suggests the Department knew or should have known of these details at the  time the passport was issued and should have taken some action to prevent issuance of the  passport.  We are also concerned that the only two case studies highlighted prominently on the  first page of the report that describe the sex of both the offender and the victim are descriptions  of crimes involving two people of the same sex.  The descriptions of the sodomy of a male child  and a search for “boy lovers” abroad could be construed to suggest the report has an anti-gay  bias.  We strongly recommend that GAO revisit its decision to highlight these case studies.
section_title: Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact
section_title: Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the contact named above, the following individuals made  major contributions to this report: Andrew O’Connell, Assistant Director;  Matthew Valenta, Assistant Director; Scott Clayton; Arturo Cornejo; Paul  Desaulniers; Alberto Garza; Ken Hill; Steve Martin; James Murphy; Daniel  Silva; and Tim Walker.