[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 35 (Thursday, March 24, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: March 24, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
         VIOLENT CRIME CONTROL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 1994

                                 ______


                               speech of

                         HON. STEPHEN E. BUYER

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, March 23, 1994

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4092) to 
     control and prevent crime.

  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of legislation that 
is tough on crime. For this reason I must state my opposition to this 
measure, H.R. 4092, the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, 
because once again Congress is attempting to posture itself as the 
leader in providing a safe environment for all Americans by getting 
criminals off the streets. But, do not let the title fool you--what is 
inside could prove hazardous to Americans' health and property.
  H.R. 4092 has been brought before the House with the same Washington 
mentality of glitz and glamour--a lot of tough talk--only to be backed 
up by weak substance and misdirected spending. Reading through this 
bill and you can see the titles: ``Federal Death Penalty,'' ``Habeas 
Corpus Revisions,'' ``Mandatory Minimum Sentencing,'' ``Three Strikes, 
You're Out,'' ``Violent Repeat Offender Incarceration,'' ``Racial 
Justice Act,'' ``Crime Prevention and Community Justice,'' ``Victims of 
Crime Act,'' ``Juvenile Prosecution Act,'' ``Assaults Against 
Children,'' ``Child Sexual Abuse Prevention,'' ``Insurance Fraud 
Prevention.'' These titles give the impression of focusing in on the 
heart of this Nation's crime epidemic. While a look at the fine print 
shows several good measures, it clearly defines how this bill places a 
greater emphasis on funding ``hug-a-thug'' programs than it does on 
true law enforcement.
  The symptoms of this Nation's ailing crime problems are clear. The 
Bureau of Justice Statistics has shown that 7 percent of the criminals 
commit 80 percent of the crimes, yet these violent criminals serve, on 
average, 37 percent of their sentences. Congress needs to show 
criminals their actions will not be tolerated. Criminals will receive 
this message if Congress enacts and expands a true, Federal death 
penalty and reforms the death row appeals provisions; requires truth-
in-sentencing provisions as it provides the necessary funding to 
incarcerate criminals for their entire sentences and replace the 
revolving door we now have on our prisons; provides funds for State and 
local law enforcement agencies to hire additional police officers and 
acquire the resources they currently lack; enacts stiffer and new 
mandatory minimum sentences; and, most importantly, corrects the 
problem our current system has of protecting the rights of the criminal 
rather than the victim.

  H.R. 4092 claims to add 25 new Federal crimes which would be subject 
to the death penalty; however, it never requires the imposition of the 
death sentence. The ``Racial Justice'' provisions undermine the 
imposition of the death penalty where it is determined to show that 
race was a statistically significant factor in decisions to seek or 
impose the death penalty. This provision confuses the question of guilt 
or innocence with racial considerations that inappropriately merge the 
issues of capital punishment and racial quotas. If you do the crime, 
you should do the time. Criminal laws must place the responsibility 
upon criminal behavior, not society.
  Criminals should not serve on death row for life. Congress should 
limit successive death row appeal petitions to questions of guilt or 
innocence. H.R. 4092 claims to revise the appeals process. Our current 
process is plagued with petitions which totally lack merit, clog the 
Federal district court dockets each year, and allow prisoners on death 
row to almost indefinitely delay their punishment. However, H.R. 4092 
would prolong the process even more. It would generally allow one 
habeas corpus appeal within 1 year of the final State appeal, relax the 
rules on when a defendant can appeal by allowing new appeals every time 
the Supreme Court makes a new procedural ruling, and require a new and 
costly requirement that at least two lawyers be appointed to represent 
the defendant at every stage in the process.

  H.R. 4092 attempts to provide facilities to keep career criminals 
locked up; 7 percent of career criminals commit three-fourths of all 
the rapes and robberies, and virtually all the murders. Statistics have 
shown that over 60,000 of these convicted, violent criminals never even 
serve a prison sentence. It is obvious that in order to effectively 
stop the proliferation of violent crimes and to remove the recidivist 
criminals from our towns and streets, we must ensure that State's have 
the resources necessary to incarcerate these criminals for the duration 
of their sentences.
  Congress must provide sufficient resources to the States to 
accommodate all criminals without strapping them with burdensome 
requirements or providing luxuries which many Americans do without, 
such as cable television, carpeting, and air conditioning. H.R. 4092 
authorizes $3 billion in Federal grant money to help States build new 
prisons or improve existing ones. The bill recommends that each State 
provide assurances that its correctional policies and programs provide 
sufficiently severe punishment for violent criminals and that criminals 
serve these sentences.

  The title of this bill is just as deceiving as are the provisions 
included in its prison program. H.R. 4092 does not require States to 
adopt policies which assure that criminals serve at least 85 percent of 
their sentences, establish pretrial detention programs, require life 
imprisonment after a certain number of offenses, allow a defendant's 
victim or the victim's family to make a statement at the time of 
sentencing, and notify the victim or the victim's family whenever the 
defendant is released.
  Congress needs to adopt a plan which would provide a flexible, 
Federal-State regional prison partnership to allow sufficient funds to 
be used to expand or operate current facilities, as well as 
construction of new prisons. It should also allow funds to be used to 
incarcerate both violent and nonviolent offenders, and allow for the 
Federal Government to fund up to 75 percent of the costs, as long as 
these funds do not replace State funds.
  Finally, H.R. 4092 misdirects spending. More than half of the $15.2 
billion authorized by this bill goes to support 10 alternative 
programs. I do not dispute the merit of many of these programs, nor do 
I ignore the fact that the disintegration of the family unit, 
illegitimacy, and government dependence are some of the causes of 
crime. Congress should deal with these aspects through welfare reform, 
enterprise zones, and family tax credits. A crime bill should focus on 
the specific aspects of the criminal justice system to make our streets 
safe. The Government should realize that it cannot assume the role of 
head of the American family.
  We must empower local communities with the resources they need to 
address crime in their areas. Congress cannot continue to fight the war 
on crime from Washington. We must build on the positive aspects already 
included in H.R. 4092 and enact tougher crime legislation as I have 
stated.

                          ____________________