OFFICIALS WANT NEW FORFEITURE BILL

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A House bill that would restrict the government's power
to confiscate private property would undermine law enforcement's ability to
fight crime, top law enforcement officials say.

Officials of the Justice Department, the Drug Enforcement Administration
and the U.S. Customs Service told a Senate subcommittee they supported a
more modest plan proposed by the Clinton administration. The Justice
Department supports tightening the rules the federal government must follow
to seize cars, cash, homes or other property linked to crime, Deputy
Attorney General Eric Holder told senators Wednesday. But a bill the House
passed 375-48 last month ``crosses the line between providing due process
and giving unintended relief to drug dealers, money launderers and other
criminals who victimize the elderly and the vulnerable in our society,'' he
said.

``There is legislation pending before the Congress which will, quite
simply, undercut the ability of law enforcement to forfeit illegally gained
property or property used to facilitate a crime, from drug dealers,
terrorists, alien smugglers and other criminals,'' said Richard Fiano, the
Drug Enforcement Administration's chief of operations.

Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., the bill's author and chairman of the House
Judiciary Committee, defended it as an effort to rid the legal system of a
practice too vulnerable to abuse. The law shouldn't allow police to seize
property simply because they suspect it was involved in wrongdoing, he said.

Too many innocent people have been deprived of their cash or possessions
without due process, he said.

``There are some issues that really get to you, and this is one,'' he said.
``I think if you're a drug dealer and you're guilty -- not just accused,
but you're guilty -- that you ought to lose your house, your car and your
shoes and socks. But when you're not guilty, ... I don't want my country
confiscating property.''

Police have used civil asset forfeiture to seize homes to shut down drug
operations quickly even before charges are filed. Investigators also have
seized boats, cash and other assets from suspected drug dealers in hopes of
driving them out of businesses.

Hyde faced skepticism from several subcommittee members. There should be a
way to strike a better balance between the rights of property owners and
the needs of law enforcement, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said.

``Forfeiture is about the government using its powers to take private
property, and there must be adequate restrictions to prevent abuse of this
power,'' said Sen. Strom Thurmond, R-S.C. But the bill passed by the House
``may undermine the use of forfeiture law in the war against drugs, child
pornography, money laundering, telemarketing fraud, terrorism and a host of
other crimes,'' Thurmond said.

Hyde criticized the Clinton administration's alternative plan, saying it
would increase the government's power to seize property, not curb it.

Under the Hyde bill, the federal government would have to prove with
``clear and convincing'' evidence that the property was eligible for
forfeiture if an owner files a legal challenge.

The administration's plan recommends a lower standard of proof, a
``preponderance'' of the evidence, which is standard in civil cases.
Current law requires property owners to prove they are not connected with
the alleged crime.

The administration also believes Hyde's bill would require the release of
cash, vehicles and other property to owners demonstrating a ``hardship,''
pending a trial even when there is compelling evidence that the property
was used in a crime.

The bill is H.R. 1658.