[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 26, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: January 26, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                             VIOLENT CRIME

  Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, I do not have very much time here this 
morning. Obviously, 5 minutes does not allow me to review the 
President's speech.
  I congratulate him on the speech in terms of content of the message 
and the way it was delivered. Obviously, the President is very good at 
that and I am sure he knows it. And I am sure the American people 
appreciated the speech in terms of raising their spirits.
  I choose today just to take a few minutes to talk about one aspect of 
the President's speech that I agree with. That has to do with violent 
crime by our teenagers and young people.
  First of all, I am convinced that we have an opportunity, because of 
this President, to adopt some very, very tough but, as he said, smart 
new laws with reference to crime; crime prevention in particular with 
reference to violent crime.
  But I am concerned, while the President is for ``three times and you 
are out''--meaning with a third felony of a violent nature you get life 
imprisonment and you do not get out--I am concerned that there are 
other provisions of the crime bill that the Senate passed that are very 
good and at least implicitly the President supports, but I am not at 
all sure that the Democratic majority in the House is not going to do 
what they have done on several other occasions when a crime bill is 
sent to them. I am concerned that they will not adopt a bill that is 
strong enough and will go to conference and we will not bring back to 
the U.S. Senate and the House and thus to our people and ultimately to 
the President--we will not bring back the kind of crime bill that left 
the Senate in terms of dealing with violent crime.
  So I would just like to suggest that I think our conferees, the 
distinguished chairman, Senator Biden, and the ranking member, Senator 
Hatch, deserve our assistance once again. I intend today to discuss a 
motion I intend to introduce to instruct conferees, which I hope all 
Senators, or at least an overwhelming majority, will support. It will 
take on the issue of ``three-time losers.'' It will also take on 
``truth in sentencing.'' It will say we ought to build the regional 
prisons that were provided for in the Hatch crime bill. It will 
highlight about six or seven sections that we are not at all sure the 
House will accept. And we are saying to our conferees in this motion to 
instruct that we want you to insist on these tough provisions.

  Now, I will outline them in more detail. I will be speaking with 
Senator Hatch and perhaps Senator Biden today. The following remarks 
outline my reasons for doing this and my concern. If ever there was a 
time that violent crime was on the minds of our people, it is now. It 
is the most serious substantive issue in the minds of average Americans 
wherever they are. It is far more important today than any of the other 
issues raised in the President's State of the Union address or that we 
raise regularly here. It might be in the minds of Americans, three 
times as important as health care reform. There might be three times as 
many Americans concerned about violent crime as there are about health 
care and other substantive issues.
  So what I suggest is that we, once again, give our leaders, who are 
going to conference soon, support by telling them we insist on the 
tough parts of this bill and that we insist that they come back from 
conference with those provisions in the bill.
  Mr. President, one of the most important tasks of this session of the 
Congress will be to enact a comprehensive and effective crime bill. The 
threat of violent crime has risen to become the No. 1 concern of the 
American people. We must respond to this concern in a forceful way, or 
we will lose not only the war on crime but the confidence our citizens 
have in the ability of the Government to control the outbreak of 
violence in our streets.
  The Senate took a major step in that direction by passing a bill last 
fall that includes significant initiatives to punish and reduce violent 
crime. Senators Biden and Hatch did a masterful job of fashioning a 
strong, bipartisan bill that was approved in the Senate by a vote of 94 
to 4. They deserve our thanks, and our strong support when they go to 
conference with the House.
  Indeed, the conference with the House represents the most difficult 
hurdle for enactment of a major crime bill.
  In the past, major crime bills have been enacted despite the House 
Judiciary Committee. The first major crime bill of the 1980's, the 1984 
Crime Act, was included on a continuing appropriations resolution after 
House Republicans successfully amended the resolution on the House 
floor. The 1986 and 1988 antidrug abuse acts were enacted only due to 
intense pressure from the White House and congressional leadership, and 
the provisions of these bills were adopted in ad hoc conferences that 
often included members not on the House and Senate Judiciary 
Committees.
  Unfortunately, we all know the fate of the 1990 crime bill; it would 
have been vetoed by President Bush after the House Judiciary Committee 
conferees successfully removed its strongest provisions.
  I am not a member of the Judiciary Committee, and will probably not 
be a conferee. But I want to assist Senators Biden and Hatch and the 
other Senate conferees. We need to help them by sending a strong, 
unmistakable message to the House conferees that certain aspects of the 
crime bill are nonnegotiable; that we will not stand for a conference 
agreement that eliminates or softens those portions of the Senate bill 
that are the toughest on violent criminals. The best way to do this, 
and to provide support for the Senate conferees, is to instruct those 
conferees to insist on retaining these provisions.
  At the appropriate time, I will move to instruct the Senate conferees 
to retain those provisions that have the greatest potential in the near 
term for reducing violent crime and punishing violent criminals. 
Undoubtedly there could be disagreements about the scope of the 
instructions to the conferees.
  However, there should be no disagreement that the crucial elements of 
any crime bill should include provisions to put three-time losers 
behind bars for life; to require truth in sentencing; to increase 
penalties for crimes committed with firearms; to provide additional 
prison space; to provide additional penalties and resources to combat 
gang violence; and to provide additional resources to prevent violence 
against women.

  My instructions will not include many of the aspects of the Senate 
bill that focus on alternative activities for youth, rehabilitation, 
and other programs not directly related to penalties and incarceration 
for violent criminal offenders. I support many of these programs, but 
my focus will be on those aspects of the bill that will meet the 
greatest opposition in the House.
  In addition, my instructions will not address the Violent Crime 
Reduction Trust Fund. It is a foregone conclusion that any agreement 
will include a means to provide funding for the crime bill without 
adding to the deficit.
  At the appropriate time, I intend to move that the Senate instruct 
the conferees on the crime bill to insist on the Senate position on 
seven sections or groups of sections in the crime bill.
  One of these is the ``three strikes, you're out'' provision, which 
the President endorsed in his State of the Union Address. I would 
include instructions that we insist that three time losers--violent 
felons convicted of three crimes--be sentenced to life imprisonment, as 
provided in the Senate bill; 7 percent of criminals commit 70 percent 
of violent crimes. Lawmakers from around the country, including the 
Governors of California and New York, recognize that it is time to lock 
up--permanently--these violent criminals that continue to prey on the 
public.
  Truth in sentencing is also a key component of the Senate bill. My 
instructions would include an insistence that the Senate conferees 
retain the section authorizing 10 regional prisons for violent 
criminals and violent criminal aliens. This proposal was included in 
the Republican crime bill sponsored by Senator Hatch. It includes the 
``truth in sentencing'' provision, which would require that States can 
qualify to put convicted criminals in these regional prisons only if 
State law is modified to require defendants to serve at least 85 
percent of the sentence ordered for crimes of violence.
  In addition, I would instruct the Senate conferees to insist on 
sections 101 through 103, which would authorize an additional 100,000 
cops on the street for State and local governments. While I have 
concerns about committing Federal resources for the long term for such 
a program, it is clear that additional police can at least have a 
deterrent effect on crime in the streets.
  Sections 201 through 215, the Federal Death Penalty Act of 1993, 
provides for the death penalty for a variety of Federal crimes, 
including the participation of drug kingpins in a continuing criminal 
enterprise and the use of a gun during a crime of violence or a drug 
trafficking crime. It is vital that we severely punish those who use 
firearms in crimes of violence and that we include these sections in a 
final crime bill.

  Sections 601 through 624 would provide for additional penalties and 
resources for the prosecution of gang-related crimes. it is clear that 
one of the major components of street crime is the proliferation of 
gangs that are committed to drug activity and other criminal 
enterprises. Senator Dole recognized this when he offered the amendment 
to the crime bill that contains many of these sections. Gang activity 
that involves murder or conspiracy to commit murder would be punishable 
by death or life imprisonment; gang leaders could receive minimum 
mandatory sentences of 15 years for certain violent crimes; Federal 
racketeering criminal charges could be brought against individuals who 
involve minors in criminal enterprises; and serious juvenile drug 
offenders could be tried as adults.
  Section 2405 of the Senate crime bill contains the D'Amato-Domenici 
amendment which requires mandatory prison terms for use, possession, or 
carrying of a firearm or destructive device during a State crime of 
violence or a State drug trafficking crime. My instructions would 
insist that the conferees retain this provision.
  Finally, my instructions would require the Senate conferees to insist 
on section 3221 of the Senate bill, which authorizes grants to State 
and local governments to combat violent crimes against women. One of 
the most alarming and disturbing trends in recent years has been the 
increase and ferocity of violent attacks on women in our society. This 
provision will provide for grants to State and local governments, 
including Indian tribes, for programs for the apprehension, 
prosecution, and adjudication of persons committing such crimes.
  Mr. President, not everyone will agree with this list of essential 
elements of the Senate crime bill; no doubt there are other provisions 
that could be included. However, these sections are the core of the 
effort to remove three time losers from society; to require truth in 
sentencing; to increase penalties for violent crime; to provide prison 
space for violent criminals; and to assist State and local governments 
with the resources to combat violent crime.
  I hope every Senator will vote in favor of these instructions. We 
need to help Senator Biden and Senator Hatch in every possible way, and 
the best way to do so would be a unanimous vote in favor of these 
provisions.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

 Domenici Motion to Instruct Conferees on H.R. 3355, The Violent Crime 
                Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1993

       Mr. President, I move that the conferees on behalf of the 
     Senate on H.R. 3355 be instructed to insist on the Senate 
     position in the following sections of the Senate amendment:
       Sections 101-103, the Public Safety Partnership and 
     Community Policing Act of 1993;
       Sections 201-215, the Federal Death Penalty Act of 1993, 
     including section 213 regarding the death penalty for gun 
     murders during Federal crimes of violence and drug 
     trafficking crimes;
       Sections 601-624, criminal youth gangs and gang 
     prosecution;
       Section 1341, regional prisons for violent criminals and 
     violent criminal aliens, including section 1341(d)(1)(A) 
     requiring truth in sentencing;
       Section 2405, mandatory prison terms for use, possession, 
     or carrying of a firearm or destructive device during a State 
     crime of violence or State drug trafficking crime;
       Section 5111, mandatory life imprisonment of persons 
     convicted of a third violent felony; and
       Section 3221, grants to combat violent crimes against 
     women.

  Mr. FAIRCLOTH addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.

                          ____________________