mr. chairman , i yield myself 5 minutes . 
mr. chairman , i rise in opposition to this amendment . 
it provides for the enactment of extremely controversial provisions which we have had inadequate time to consider . 
we have not had the opportunity to hear critical testimony on controversial aspects of this bill such as the provision to apply the death penalty to offenses where no death results , the change in alternative jury rules and peremptory challenge rules , another change of the number of jurors needed to impose the death penalty and other changes which could constitute constitutional problems . 
another problem with the bill , it provides for expansion of the federal death penalty , both for crimes that the supporters of the death penalty might think warrant the death penalty , as well as crimes that most people would not expect to be associated with the most severe of penalties . 
this bill does not limit crimes through the death penalty eligibility to the heinous crimes or those who have traditionally been considered severe enough to require either a death penalty or even life without parole . 
the bill is so broad that it includes offenses such as those related to protection of computers , property offenses and financial or other material support provisions . 
because the bill makes attempts and conspiracies to commit such crimes death penalty eligible , it covers those who may have only had a minor role in the offense . 
if a death results , even if it was not the specific intended result , anyone who is involved in committing or attempting to commit or conspiring to commit the covert offense would be eligible for the death penalty . 
the provisions of this bill create a death penalty liability tantamount to a federal felony murder rule , and it presents constitutional issues as well as questions of the appropriateness of the death penalty in certain cases . 
the provisions of this bill will be duplicative of state jurisdiction laws in many instances and actually conflicting with others . 
one such conflict would be where a state has chosen not to authorize capital punishment and the federal government pursues the death penalty against that state 's wishes . 
another concern we always have to consider is expansion of the death penalty when we know that there is a frequent error rate in applying the death penalty . 
one study showed that 68 percent of the death penalty decisions by the trial court were eventually overturned . 
mr. chairman , there is another conflict or difficulty that will arise in the efforts to further international cooperation in pursuing suspected terrorists . 
we are already experiencing difficulties in securing the cooperation of the rest of the civilized world in bringing terrorists to justice due to our existing proliferation of death penalty offenses when other countries will not extradite criminals to the united states if they will be subject to the death penalty . 
when we add these difficulties to the other controversial issues as to whether someone who supports an organization 's social or humanitarian programs knows that it has been designated as a terrorist organization it can only exacerbate the difficulty and further undermine united states efforts . 
mr. chairman , i reserve the balance of my time . 
