Mr. Chairman, I should like to thank you for this opportunity to testify before the Subcommittee on Crime as you take up the difficult issue of pornography. You have a history of thoughtful consideration of legislation concerning the various issues that fall within your Subcommittee's jurisdiction, so I am very happy that you have included in these hearings H.R. 1213 legislation that I have introduced, the Pornography Victims Protection Act. I Pornography has always existed in our society, hut, as it has become more available to the general public, either from the local magazine stand, the neighborhood video store, or over the telephone through Dial-a-Porn lines, concern over the effects of pornography on society has increased. It has been difficult to reach agreement on what needs to be done because there is debate over whether pornography is truly harmful and over what can be done about pornography without violating First Amendment rights of free speech. I think those questions are very important and must be considered very carefully. THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE WITH RECYCLED FIBERS Page Two Such careful consideration will, I know, occur during these hearings and in subsequent work on proposed pornography legislation. What I should like to propose today is that, while debate over obscenity law mostly addresses offensiveness to community standards, what we need to do, as a first step in the fight against pornography, is address the offensiveness of the sexual exploitation of people those who are intimidated, defrauded, or coerced into posing or performing in pornography and who may suffer harm in the process. - We can no longer stand by and say that pornography is a victimless crime. The Meese Commission has substantiated that the pornography industry is an underground industry controlled by organized crime. It has also documented the fact that the abuses of coercion, intimidation, and fraudulent inducement into posing and performing in pornography are rampant in the pornography industry. The victims are often people who were sexually abused as children and/or are financially distressed. This, to me, is a major outrage of pornography, and it is time to empower the victims and provide them with legal recourse for the harm that has been done to them. It would The Pornography Victims Protection Act is unique contrasted to all other pornography legislation because it confronts this problem and provides the opportunity for justice without infringing on the First Amendment. allow victims of pornography, both child and adult, who are coerced, intimidated or fraudulently induced into posing or performing in pornography to institute Federal civil actions against producers and distributors. If they prevail, such victims could receive treble their actual damages and the cost of bringing suit. Victims could also obtain injunctions to prevent further Page Three production and distribution of the pornography. In addition to providing monetary and injunctive relief to victims, direct civil actions will facilitate enforcement of related criminal statutes. Current enforcement of these laws is seriously inadequate. This is due, in part, to the difficulties prosecutors face in discovering those who produce coerced child and adult pornography. Investigations of these cases generally are difficult, expensive and time consuming, and victims frequently cannot be identified. This bill provides one further mechanism for deterring sexual exploitation and compensating victims. Under the bill, the Attorney General is authorized to seek $100,000 in civil penalties from pornographers who use children or coerced adults. If the Government prevails, it is authorized to distribute the penalty money among all of the identified victims in the case. Like a direct action for victims, a Government action for civil penalties will be subject to a lower burden of proof (preponderance of evidence rather than beyond a reasonable doubt) than in a criminal prosecution and this should facilitate action against pornographers. Unlike direct actions, however, victims would not be required to come forward publicly. This is an especially valuable benefit in child pornography cases, since many child victims are unwilling or unable to endure the severe traumas of courtroom testimony. Page Four Due to its dubious legal status and organized crime involvement, pornography is primarily an underground industry with little or no accountability toward its work conditions or product. Obscenity law only addresses the offense to society's sensibilities and ignores the victimization that is part and parcel of the pornography industry. Without conflicting with First Amendment rights, the Pornography Victims Protection Act would provide civil remedies to the forgotten victims whose hurts are unaddressed by current and other proposed obscenity laws. Its broad-based support, including 111 Republican and Democratic House co-sponsors and the endorsement of the National Organization for Women (the first, and so far only, endorsement of anti-pornography legislation by NOW), and Feminists Fighting Pornography, indicates to me that this is legislation whose time has come. Thank you again for this opportunity to present the Pornography Victims Protection Act for your consideration. Mr. HUGHES. Our next witness is Representative Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania. Welcome, Tom. TESTIMONY OF HON. THOMAS J. RIDGE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA Mr. RIDGE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I echo my colleagues' thanks to you and your subcommittee for the opportunity to appear before you, and your untiring leadership on this particular issue. I know recently-as a matter of fact, it was last weekend-that you were very prominently featured in a significant article in northwestern Pennsylvania; and I empathize with your desire to quit opening mail and get on with the task. I know your colleagues support you in that effort. So, again, we congratulate you for your leadership on this particular issue. I would like to ask unanimous consent that my full testimony previously submitted be included as part of the record so I may just summarize. Mr. HUGHES. Without objection, so ordered. Mr. RIDGE. Mr. Chairman, sometime ago after a town meeting, an elderly woman came up to me, and in a clandestine, almost secretive fashion, almost embarrassingly, handed me an envelope that had marked on it "Personal attention, obscene material enclosed." She said, "Congressman, I didn't want to bring this up to you in public but would you please take a look at it when you conclude today or sometime today and report back to me what you think about it and what you think should be done." When I opened the envelope, it revealed a glossy, four-page, multi-colored, very expensive, advertisement for pornographic films. Since all of us from time to time use direct mail for purposes dealing with our profession, we can understand the cost of that kind of mass mailing. Mind you now, it was very well done-four pages, glossy, multi-colored; sexually, very explicit material, advertising low-cost video films. I think the cost was $4.16 each, but the deal was to get nine of them for $49.95. I will tell you that I attached a copy of that sample-you don't quite get the impact of it in black and white-to the testimony I have submitted, and I do hope you include it as part of the record. Mr. HUGHES. I might just say that that is a part of the record, Tom. [The submitted material is available for review in the Crime Subcommittee office.] Mr. RIDGE. Thank you, I appreciate that very much. When I looked into what the Congress and what the Federal Government has tried to do to limit this kind of activity, limit the use of the mails; understanding, of course, the problems and the debate about censorship and freedom of speech; I discovered there existed a statute referred to as the Goldwater Amendment. In this amendment the home owner or the addressee is obliged to go to the Post Office after they have received it and read it, and then it is their duty to sign a form saying that they don't want to receive this information or this kind of solicitation again. Then it is up to the Federal Government, and they do get many kudos on this on |