Sen. Grassley made the following statement today regarding Pope Francis' visit to Washington, D.C.  The text of the statement can be found below and the video can be found here.

"This week, I had the second opportunity in my life to be in the presence of a pope.  This visit was an historic one.  Pope Francis made his first trip to the United States and a pope addressed Congress for the first time in history.

"I attended the White House ceremony on Wednesday welcoming the pope to our nation's capital.  The ceremony was spectacular, with more pomp and circumstance than even ceremonies for presidents of other countries.

"This morning, Pope Francis gave a strong speech that was well received by Congress.  He talked about the American spirit and the American dream.  America, as he says, is still a land of dreams for many people.  And he's right.

"He also talked about the state of our world today, how violent conflict seems to be increasing, and the challenges we as a nation and as a people face.  He said that these challenges call for a renewal of that 'spirit of cooperation' that has done so much good in our country's history.

"He mentioned four Americans who have contributed to this: Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Dorothy Day, and Thomas Merton, and spoke of their contributions to American society.

"I appreciated the opportunity to hear from Pope Francis.  Even if I don't agree with him on all matters, as fellow Christians we do see eye-to-eye on the essentials.  It was inspiring to hear a leader of such high esteem."

Grassley Pressing for Details about Discipline Disparity between Whistleblowers and Supervisors who Retaliated

WASHINGTON - Senator Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is pressing for answers about what appears to be an unusually low number of FBI employees disciplined for retaliating against whistleblowers.  In contrast, whistleblowers are often disciplined as reprisal for reporting wrongdoing.

Grassley said that the difference in the number of disciplinary actions points to a long standing double standard between high-ranking officials and other employees that has been a part of the culture at the FBI for years.   Grassley added that the disparity suggests that the FBI favors employees who retaliated against whistleblowers more than the whistleblowers themselves.

In a letter sent this week to FBI Director James Comey, Grassley noted that since 2004, the FBI has disciplined only five employees for retaliatory conduct, and no individual has been punished for such retaliatory conduct since 2012. Grassley contrasted those figures to the much higher number of employees who have claimed they suffered reprisal for reporting wrongdoing at the Bureau.

"This discrepancy merits continued oversight over the FBI's discipline of those who retaliate against whistleblowers, because punishing such retaliators is necessary to change the culture of the Bureau and to send a clear message that retaliation will not be tolerated," Grassley wrote to Comey.

Grassley held a hearing on March 4, 2015 about whistleblower retaliation at the FBI.  The hearing brought to light a Government Accountability Office report that the Justice Department had dismissed a large number of otherwise valid reprisal complaints from the FBI based on technicalities.  Many of these cases were thrown out because FBI employees had reported wrongdoing to their direct supervisors, which curiously does not "count" as a protected disclosure under the Justice Department's current regulations.

A copy of the letter can be found here.

NOTICE OF COMMITTEE HEARING

The Senate Committee on the Judiciary has scheduled a hearing of the Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest entitled "Oversight of the Administration's FY 2016 Refugee Resettlement Program: Fiscal and Security Implications" for Thursday October 1, 2015 at 2:00 p.m., in Room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

By order of the Chairman.

Bipartisan Group of Senators File Legislative Fix to Ensure Inspectors General Have Access to All Agency Records

WASHINGTON - United States Senators Ron Johnson, Claire McCaskill, Chuck Grassley, Joni Ernst, Tammy Baldwin, Tom Carper, John Cornyn, James Lankford, Susan Collins, Kelly Ayotte, Mark Kirk, and Barbara Mikulski filed a bipartisan substitute amendment to S. 579, the Inspector General Empowerment Act of 2015. The new language includes a provision addressing an opinion from the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel, which allows the Justice Department, and potentially other agencies, to deny access to records sought by the Inspector General.

The Inspector General Act of 1978 authorizes each Inspector General to access "all records" in their agency's possession in the conduct of an oversight investigation or audit.  However, on July 20, 2015, the Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion arguing that other provisions generally restricting the "disclosure" of certain kinds of information override the "all records" provision of the Inspector General Act.  The Office of Legal Counsel reached this conclusion despite clear and recent language enacted in response to the controversy over these very access issues. The Department of Justice's fiscal year 2015 Appropriations Act prohibited the agency from denying the Inspector General timely access to records.  The only exception was for any "express" limitation in the Inspector General Act.

The July Office of Legal Counsel opinion requires the Inspector General to obtain agency permission to access certain documents in the ordinary course of its oversight work, and reverses the presumption of the Inspector General Act that inspectors general have unfettered access to any and all information they deem necessary for effective oversight.  The broad opinion also left open the door for other agencies to rely on it to deny their inspectors general access to documents.

The opinion was met with swift opposition from Congress.  Senate leaders on the Judiciary Committee and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and House leaders on the Committee on the Judiciary and Committee on Oversight and Government Reform sent a letter to the Department rejecting the opinion's interpretation of the Inspector General Act and pressed the Obama administration to provide legislative language that would ensure inspectors general receive unfettered access to all agency documents. The Chairman and Ranking Member of the Commerce, Justice and Science Appropriations Subcommittee also sent a letter to the Justice Department saying that the Office of Legal Counsel's interpretation of Section 218 was completely wrong and counter to Congress's clear intent.

As a result of discussions with the inspectors general community, the Justice Department, and others, the bipartisan group of Senators have agreed on legislative language to ensure inspectors general are able to access all agency documents.  The substitute amendment amends the bipartisan S. 579, the Inspector General Empowerment Act, which was reported unanimously out of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee earlier this year, by adding the agreed upon language on inspector general access to documents. S. 579 provides some much-needed authorities for inspectors general to ensure they can perform their watchdog responsibilities in an efficient and independent manner.

Chairman Johnson said, "I am pleased that a bipartisan group of senators came together to make clear once again that inspectors general must have unfettered access to all agency documents. I am committed to working with my colleagues to pass this commonsense bill through the Senate to ensure that all inspectors general have the authority and the statutorily mandated independence they need to perform their watchdog responsibilities."

Chairman Grassley said, "The Justice Department opinion is contrary to the law and to the reason Congress created inspectors general - an independent overseer of the executive branch.  We couldn't have been more clear last year to ensure inspectors general received access to all documents, but the law seems to have been ignored.   The action we're taking with this new legislation leaves no room for misinterpretation."

Senator McCaskill said, "This legislation would help address a troubling decision by the Justice Department that undermines our watchdogs' ability to exercise critical oversight. Inspectors General are the eyes and ears of the public, helping to guard against the waste and abuse of their tax dollars, but they can't do that job effectively without access to agency documents?so I'm pleased to work with a bipartisan group of my colleagues to help restore that access."

 

A copy of the substitute amendment is here.

###

Q/A:  Know Before You Owe with U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley

 

Q: How can students avoid graduating with an overwhelming debt burden?

A: A new school year is under way and a fresh crop of students has started a new chapter on college campuses across the country. In our 21^st century economy, it's widely considered a smart move to pursue higher education or vocational training as the next generation looks to secure financial independence and self-sufficiency. Many studies report that college graduates significantly improve their lifetime earning potential by earning an advanced degree. However, reading the fine print of those studies also shows a disparate range of earning potential based on one's field of study, as an example.  So, considering the substantial student debt burden that a growing percentage of graduates struggles to repay - the U.S. Department of Education's student loan portfolio exceeds $1 trillion  - it's important that policymakers examine the federal government's lending practices and the borrowing behavior of college-bound students.  Specific steps can be taken to encourage financial literacy and teach students to become smarter, savvier borrowers. The federal government has a responsibility to the taxpaying public and to student borrowers to ensure that students understand their income to debt ratio, as an example. My bipartisan legislation, the Know Before You Owe Federal Student Loan Act, would strengthen loan counseling requirements and establish a more transparent process in which institutions of higher education take steps to help student borrowers graduate with less debt hanging over their heads. Apart from my legislation, colleges should take care to keep tuition and living expenses as low as possible to avoid putting pressure on students to borrow more than they can afford.

Q: How would your bill address staggering student debt in America?

A: As a fiscal conservative, I share the tight-fisted views of hard-working Iowans who agree that Washington can't tax, spend or borrow its way to prosperity. Borrowing beyond one's means or potential ability to repay puts future prosperity at risk. A sensible rule of thumb for student borrowers is not to take on more debt than what is necessary to pay for college. A University of Iowa estimate suggests about 40 percent of the average $25,000 student loan debt exceeds what is needed to pay tuition, room and board.  That means a student borrower graduates with an extra $10,000 debt burden. That makes it even harder to stretch a paycheck to pay other monthly bills, such as rent, insurance and utilities. And let's be clear. The federal government shouldn't lend more than is necessary and underwrite lifestyle extras that aren't necessary to earn a college education.  Student borrowers need to come to grips with the size and scope of their debt burden. That's why my bill would upgrade the student loan counseling provision into an annual requirement, not just for first-time borrowers. It also would require colleges: to furnish an estimate of a student's projected debt to income ratio that forecasts a repayment schedule with the starting wages in their particular field of study; inform student borrowers how not graduating on time would add significantly to their debt burden; and to counsel them against the risks of over borrowing. Again, students need to understand they do not need to borrow the maximum amount for which they are eligible. Finally, my bill would require that students receive regular statements about their loan while they are still in school, not just when they must start repaying. Regular reminders about one's repayment responsibilities will help promote mindful borrowing, as opposed to an out of sight, out of mind debt burden. Knowing what you owe, before you go to college, will help make the next generation of students smarter borrowers and better financial stewards. These are invaluable lifetime lessons that will pay it forward for years to come.

Grassley Praises Committee Passage of Bill to Fight Transnational Drug Trafficking

WASHINGTON - Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee and the Caucus on International Narcotics Control, today praised Judiciary Committee passage of a bill he co-sponsored to help combat transnational drug trafficking.

"Since drug cartels are continually evolving, this legislation ensures that our criminal laws keep pace," Grassley said. "The bill closes a loophole abused by drug traffickers who intend for drugs to end up in the United States but supply them through an intermediary.  The Justice Department needs every legal tool to help crack down on those who ship these substances over the border into our country."

Grassley is the lead Republican on the bipartisan Transnational Drug Trafficking Act, introduced in January with Sen. Dianne Feinstein as the lead Democrat.  The bill, which passed the Senate unanimously in the 112th and 113th Congresses, would provide the Department of Justice with new tools to prosecute international drug traffickers in foreign countries.  In particular, it would help the department build extradition cases on drug kingpins from the Andean region, which includes Colombia and Peru.  Kingpins from these countries often use Mexican drug trafficking organizations as intermediaries to ship illegal narcotics to the United States.

The bill also would help the Department of Justice combat the international trafficking of methamphetamine, which is increasingly being trafficked from Mexico into the United States, including into Iowa.  Meth continues to be a problem in Iowa.  The latest data indicates that meth labs are at an all-time low in Iowa, but treatment admissions are at an all-time high.

-30-

Grassley Joins Effort to End Federal Power Grab that Threatens Agriculture

WASHINGTON - Senator Chuck Grassley has joined 46 senators to introduce a resolution of disapproval of the rule on the Waters of the United States put forth by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers.

A resolution of disapproval is a legislative procedure used to try to overturn regulations and rules put forth by the executive branch.  If the Senate and House pass the resolution, the President must sign it to become law.  If the President vetoes the bill, Congress must overturn the veto for the resolution to take effect.

"The indifferent attitude that the EPA took toward agriculture is a real concern for Iowans who know the impact agriculture has on the state's economy.  Every Iowa farmer has to be on their toes. The rule could result in significant red tape and expense for Iowa farmers as they make routine decisions about how best to use their land, even ironically hampering projects to improve water quality," Grassley said.

Grassley is a cosponsor of a bipartisan bill in the Senate to require that the Waters of the United States rule be completely revised with stakeholder input.  He also is a cosponsor of legislation that would clearly define the scope of Clean Water Act jurisdiction in the law rather than leaving it to the EPA.  In addition, both the Senate and House of Representatives appropriations committees have passed bills that deny funding for the EPA to carry out this rule.

The resolution was led by Senator Joni Ernst.  Original cosponsors of the resolution include Senators Lamar Alexander, John Barrasso, Roy Blunt, John Boozman, Richard Burr, Shelly Moore Capito, Dan Coats, Thad Cochran, John Cornyn, Tom Cotton, Mike Crapo, Ted Cruz, Steve Daines, Mike Enzi, Deb Fischer, Jeff Flake, Cory Gardner, Lindsey Graham, Orrin Hatch, Dean Heller, John Hoeven, Johnny Isakson, Ron Johnson, James Lankford, Mike Lee, John McCain, Mitch McConnell, Jerry Moran, Lisa Murkowski, Rand Paul, David Perdue, Jim Risch, Pat Roberts, Mike Rounds, Marco Rubio, Ben Sasse, Tim Scott, Jeff Sessions, Richard Shelby, Dan Sullivan, John Thune, Thom Tillis, Pat Toomey, David Vitter, and Roger Wicker.

-30-

Grassley Receives "Fueling Growth" Award for Support of Ethanol Industry

WASHINGTON - Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa on Tuesday received the 2015 Fueling Growth Award from Growth Energy for his work to develop policies that support clean-burning, domestically produced ethanol.  Grassley was presented the award at the Growth Energy Advocacy Conference in Washington, D.C., where he spoke about renewable energy and the Renewable Fuel Standard.

"I'm honored to receive this award," Grassley said.  "I've been an advocate of renewable fuels for a long time, starting with ethanol.  Alternative energy sources reduce our dependence on foreign oil, increase national security, and create jobs for American workers in addition to extending our fuel supply and lowering prices at the pump."

The award is given annually by Growth Energy to members of Congress who support ethanol advancement and work to craft consistent and fair federal policy for the industry.

Grassley vigorously advocates for the maintenance and strength of the Renewable Fuel Standard.  In July 2015, Grassley urged the Environmental Protection Agency to revise and increase its proposed volume obligations for renewable biofuels under the Renewable Fuel Standard for 2014, 2015 and 2016.  In April, Grassley led a bipartisan group of senators in calling for a strong volume requirement for biodiesel under the RFS.

In July 2015, Grassley also secured Finance Committee passage of tax incentives for biodiesel and cellulosic ethanol in a bipartisan tax extenders bill.   The committee accepted a Grassley amendment to change the biodiesel fuels tax credit from a mixture credit to a production credit for 2016.  Among the benefits, the change would ensure that U.S. tax policy incentivizes a domestic industry instead of subsidizing imported biofuels.  The provision, along with other tax extenders provisions, awaits full Senate consideration.

Nationally, the renewable fuels industry supported more than 400,000 jobs and added $53 billion to the nation's Gross Domestic Product in 2014, according to Growth Energy.

The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association reported that with 43 ethanol plants and 3.9 billion gallons produced in 2014, Iowa ethanol production is at a record high and is the largest producer of ethanol in the country.  Iowa's production accounts for about 27 percent of national ethanol production.

 

ATF Whistleblowers Allege Sexual Harassment, Discrimination, Intimidation by Managers

 

WASHINGTON - Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley is asking about the handling of multiple claims of sexual harassment, bullying, gender discrimination and witness intimidation by senior Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) managers dating back to 2012, including alleged attempts to prevent independent oversight by the Inspector General.  The allegations from eight whistleblowers include threats, unwanted sexual advances, graphic sexual comments and attempts to retaliate against employees who disclosed the inappropriate behavior.

One whistleblower reported that in the fall of 2012, a then-Special Operations Division Deputy Chief yelled at her in front of subordinates and used her battle with cancer as justification for transferring her job duties to male counterparts.  This may be a violation of the Rehabilitation Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in federal employment.  She reported the behavior to his superior, the Special Operations Division Chief at the time, which was followed by increased retaliation, including threats to launch an internal personnel investigation against the whistleblower.

Other whistleblowers alleged that the same Special Operations Division deputy chief attempted to photograph several female employees despite their objections, and that he squeezed one woman's thigh at a work related dinner event.  They also claim that he used derogatory and offensive language to refer to women in the workplace. One whistleblower alleged that she was placed on administrative leave after she was called as a witness to testify in an Internal Affairs investigation of harassment claims.

Many of the whistleblowers reported their claims to the Internal Affairs Division, which they say has been largely unhelpful. They allege that such disclosures are frequently suppressed for years, preventing further investigations by the Office of Inspector General. They also claim that ATF Acting Director Thomas Brandon and then-Director, B. Todd Jones were aware of the allegations of sexual harassment, yet the alleged harasser has since been promoted.

In a letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz, Grassley is seeking information on the procedures for reporting and responding to claims of harassment, whether they were followed, and how harassers are disciplined.  Grassley also requested statistical information, broken down by gender, on agency responses to such allegations.

Text of Grassley's letter

 

Prepared Statement by Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee

Hearing on "Reforming the Electronic Communications Privacy Act"

September 16, 2015

 

Today's hearing is intended to help inform the Committee about the most recent views of a wide variety of stakeholders concerning the need to reform the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, or ECPA, and various ways of doing so.  The Committee's last hearing on the topic was four and a half years ago.  Since then, numerous proposals have been advanced by members of the Committee.

In 1986, Congress enacted ECPA to both protect the privacy of Americans' electronic communications and provide the government with a means to access those communications and related records in certain circumstances.  However, dramatic changes in the use of communications technology have occurred since then.

Americans now depend on email, text messages, social networking websites, web-based apps, and countless other electronic communication methods on a daily basis.  And more than ever, these communications are being retained in some form, due to the dramatic reduction in the cost of storing data in the cloud.

These communication technologies are enriching all of our lives.  They are of great help to me in keeping in touch with my constituents in Iowa.  And for the most part, we have American technology companies to thank for this digital revolution.  These companies are now a significant engine of growth for our economy by creating an increasingly global market for these communications technologies.

But of course, these technologies are also being used every day by those who intend to do our society great harm - terrorists, violent drug dealers, child predators, environmental criminals, and the like.  These technologies create a digital trail that is often essential to bringing these offenders to justice.

In light of these changes, there is a growing consensus that ECPA must be modernized to adapt to this new landscape.  And whatever updates to the law we make, of course, must be consistent with the requirements of the Fourth Amendment.

The privacy and technology communities have criticized ECPA for failing to provide sufficient privacy safeguards for individuals' stored electronic communications.  Indeed, given the way Americans use email today, it hardly makes sense that the privacy protections for an email should turn on whether it's more than 180 days old, or whether it's been opened.

At the same time, law enforcement officials have expressed concern with certain aspects of the current ECPA framework and how it currently works in practice.  And they are concerned that reform efforts to a statute they use every day do not unduly hamper their ability to investigate violations of the law.

For example, the Department of Justice has expressed concern about efforts to change the ECPA notice requirements to provide targets with unprecedented amounts of information that could compromise ongoing investigations.

Both the Department and civil law enforcement agencies have expressed the need to address an emerging gap in their authorities if the target of an investigation fails to respond to lawful civil process for email evidence in the target's possession.  They contend that this gap could allow offenses such as civil rights violations, securities fraud, and consumer fraud to go unpunished.

In addition, many state and local law enforcement officials are frustrated with the current timeliness and quality of responses by providers.  Unlike traditional search warrants, law enforcement agents cannot control how quickly they obtain evidence through ECPA warrants; they rely on the providers to conduct searches for them.  To these officials, any heightening of ECPA's legal standards should be accompanied by changes to the law that ensure that they receive the information they need on a timely basis.

In addition, some officials have expressed concern that the voluntary nature of ECPA's emergency exception can result in unacceptable delay in important cases - for example, when a child is abducted.

Closely related to these concerns is the ongoing issue of encryption and the "Going Dark" problem, which the Committee recently held a hearing on.  This is another example of a situation where agents may meet the legal standard to obtain critical evidence - but then are not able to access it quickly enough, or even at all.

As I said at our last hearing on ECPA reform in 2011, if we are considering changing the legal standards under ECPA, we should also "be working to ensure that these same providers are granting law enforcement the necessary access" to address the "Going Dark" issue.  I sent a letter to the Deputy Attorney General last week to get an update from the Department about how that process is proceeding.

Reforming ECPA's treatment of stored electronic communications, therefore, is a complicated and potentially far-reaching endeavor that sits at the intersection of the privacy rights of the public, the investigative needs of law enforcement professionals, society's interest in encouraging and expanding commerce, and the dictates of the Constitution.

The key is to strike the right balance between these interests.  As Ranking Member Leahy declared at our last hearing on this topic in 2011, "meaningful ECPA reform must carefully balance privacy rights, public safety, and security."  I couldn't agree more.  I'm grateful for the presence of all the witnesses here today and look forward to their testimony.  I now recognize Senator Leahy for his opening statement.

-30-