HR 1993
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 1993
To improve the delivery of counterterrorism financing training
and technical assistance by providing for greater interagency coordination
and cooperation, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 23, 2007
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin (for herself, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, and
Mr. SCOTT of Georgia) introduced the following bill; which was referred
to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee
on Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within
the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
A BILL
To improve the delivery of counterterrorism financing training
and technical assistance by providing for greater interagency coordination
and cooperation, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Counterterrorism Financing Coordination
Act'.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds as follows:
(1) In an October 2005 report to the Congress, the Comptroller General
reviewed the United States Government's interagency efforts to coordinate
the delivery of training and technical assistance to countries vulnerable
to terrorist financing, and issues of accountability in the blocking
of terrorist assets held in the United States by the Secretary of the
Treasury.
(2) In April 2006, the Comptroller General of the United States testified
before the Congress on the findings of the October 2005 report and,
among other things, the Comptroller General testified that `Although
the United States Government provides a range of training and technical
assistance to countries it deems vulnerable to terrorist financing,
it does not have a strategic and integrated plan to coordinate the delivery
of this assistance.'.
(3) The Terrorist Financing Working Group, an interagency entity established
by the National Security Council and chaired by the Secretary of State,
coordinates the delivery of training and technical assistance to nearly
two dozen countries the Working Group considers to be priority countries,
as well as to other countries the Working Group considers to be nonpriority
countries, that are vulnerable to terrorist financing.
(4) The Comptroller General testified that the Secretary of State and
the Secretary of the Treasury disagree about the roles and procedures
of each agency within the Terrorist Financing Working Group for the
delivery of counterterrorism financing training and technical assistance,
thereby causing the overall effort to lack effective leadership.
(5) An example of how this disagreement has impacted the delivery of
training and technical assistance to countries vulnerable to terrorist
financing is as follows:
(A) In May 2005, the Department of State denied a Department of the
Treasury employee official entry into a priority country in response
to a request from the central bank of that country to set up a financial
intelligence unit.
(B) The Secretary of State told the Comptroller General that the Department
wanted to conduct a Terrorist Financing Working Group assessment before
allowing the Department of the Treasury to continue its work.
(C) According to the report of the Government Accountability Office,
the United States Ambassador to the country requested a delay in the
assessment and the work of the Department of the Treasury was allowed
to proceed.
(D) However, as a result of this disagreement, the entry of the Department
of the Treasury official into the country and the work itself was
delayed by several months.
(6) The Comptroller General testified that the interagency coordinating
effort on terrorist financing training and technical assistance lacked
other key elements that are critical to effective strategic planning,
such as the strategic alignment of resources with needs and risks, and
a process to measure results.
(7) The October 2005 report of the Comptroller General found that the
Attorney General, who provides technical assistance in the drafting
of anti-terrorist financing legislation for priority countries, concluded
that `having procedures and practices for Terrorist Financing Working
Group priority countries that differ from those for other vulnerable
countries creates problems'.
(8) The October 2005 report of the Comptroller General cited several
instances of interagency disagreements on whether it is appropriate
for contractors for the United States to provide legislative drafting
assistance for counterterrorism financing legislation.
(9) In connection with this disagreement, the Secretary of State and
the Attorney General believe that legislative drafting should be conducted
by officials of the Department of Justice, while the Secretary of the
Treasury, in some instances, advocated the use of contractors for nonpriority
countries.
(10) The Attorney General objected to the use of contractors and indicated
that previous contractor work on legislative drafting did not meet international
standards for effective counterterrorism financing legislation, citing
as an example the work of a contractor to the Agency for International
Development who assisted in drafting legislation which officials of
the Department of Justice had to complete because the draft included
substantial deficiencies, in the opinion of the Attorney General.
(11) In April 2006, officials representing the Secretary of State and
the Secretary of the Treasury testified before the Financial Services
Committee of the House of Representatives that they did not act on the
Comptroller General's recommendations to develop a strategic and integrated
plan for the delivery of counterterrorism financing training and technical
assistance and to enter into an interagency Memorandum of Agreement
that clarifies each agency's roles and responsibilities.
(12) The officials testified that both the Secretary of State and the
Secretary of the Treasury believe that an integrated strategic plan
already exists and that `There is no desire among the Terrorist Financing
Working Group agencies to reinvent a process that has worked well for
several years and worked even better since the issuance of the General
Accountability Office report.'.
(13) The Comptroller General recommended in his congressional testimony
that Congress require `the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the
Treasury to submit an annual report to Congress showing the status of
interagency efforts to develop and implement an integrated strategic
plan and Memorandum of Agreement to ensure Terrorist Financing Working
Group's seamless functioning, particularly with respect to Terrorist
Financing Working Group roles and procedures'.
SEC. 3. MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT REQUIRED.
(a) In General- The Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury
shall negotiate and enter into a Memorandum of Agreement (hereafter in
this section referred to as the `Agreement') specifying the role of each
of the Secretaries' respective Departments in the delivery of counterterrorism
financing training and technical assistance provided to countries abroad
(without regard to whether any country is designated as a priority country
or a nonpriority country by the Terrorist Financing Working Group).
(b) Specific Subject To Be Included- In addition to such other matters
as the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury determine
to be appropriate for inclusion in the Agreement, the Agreement shall
include the following:
(1) LEADERSHIP AND ROLE- The specific designation of leadership, and
the role of each agency, in the delivery of counterterrorism financing
training and technical assistance to all countries (without regard to
whether any country is designated as a priority country or a nonpriority
country by the Terrorist Financing Working Group).
(2) DISPUTE RESOLUTION METHODOLOGY- A methodology and procedures for
resolving interagency disputes over the delivery of counterterrorism
financing training and technical assistance, which shall include specific
and reasonable timeframes for seeking such resolution before elevating
unresolved disagreements to the next level of decision-making, up to
and including the Secretaries, and a process for submitting any disputes
the Secretaries are unable to resolve within a specific and reasonable
timeframe to the National Security Council for resolution.
(3) COORDINATION OF FUNDING AND RESOURCES- The coordination of funding
and resources for counterterrorism financing and anti-money laundering
training and technical assistance delivered to all countries (without
regard to whether any country is designated as a priority country or
a nonpriority country by the Terrorist Financing Working Group), including
the means for providing a transparent assessment of United States Government
resources and a method for aligning those resources with the needs of
vulnerable countries.
(4) PRIVATE CONTRACTORS- A procedure for determining the appropriateness
of any use of contractors by the Secretary of the Treasury in the delivery
of counterterrorism financing training and technical assistance in any
country (without regard to whether the country is designated as a priority
country or a nonpriority country by the Terrorist Financing Working
Group), including a system for evaluating, in consultation with the
Secretary of State, the Attorney General and other appropriate officers,
the quality of work performed by such contractors.
(5) PERFORMANCE EVALUATION- A process to measure the performance and
results of counterterrorism training and technical assistance.
SEC. 4. ANNUAL REPORT.
(a) In General- The Secretary of the Treasury shall include in the annual
report to the Congress on terrorist assets complete information on the
nature and extent of activities, during the period covered by the report,
in blocking access of owners or account holders to financial assets due
to the connection of such owners or accountholders to terrorism.
(b) Contents- The report under subsection (a) shall include the following:
(1) The results of the performance evaluation under Memorandum of Agreement
entered into pursuant to section 3 for the period covered by the report.
(2) Differences in amounts blocked between the period covered by the
report and preceding periods.
(3) When and why blocks were removed from financial assets during period
covered by the report.
(4) The achievements and obstacles faced by the United States Government
with respect to locating and blocking terrorist assets or in the delivery
of counterterrorism financing training and technical assistance.
END
