[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 81 (Thursday, June 23, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: June 23, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                            CRIME CONFERENCE

  Mr. DOLE. Madam President, after months of delay, the Senate and 
House have finally begun their conference deliberations on a crime 
bill.
  The conference could not be more timely, for sadly, in the America of 
1994, no community, no neighborhood, no city, no one person is 
completely safe. The scourge of crime is everywhere. Everyone is at 
risk.
  So, Madam President, as the conference begins its work, the American 
people have a right to ask some important questions:
  Will the conference report adopt a hard-headed approach to violent 
crime and violent criminals, or will it simply take a page out of the 
old and discredited root causes playbook, pumping billions and billions 
of additional Federal dollars into social welfare programs of dubious 
value?
  Will the conference contain the so-called Racial Justice Act 
provisions, allowing criminal defendants to overturn their capital 
sentences using statistics alone? Or will it heed the warnings of the 
National Association of Attorneys' General, the National District 
Attorneys' Association, and other law enforcement groups who argue that 
these provisions would have the practical effect of abolishing the 
death penalty nationwide--at both the Federal and State levels?
  Will the conference report devote enough resources to incarceration 
so that we can finally slam shut the revolving prison door? And will it 
emphasize truth-in-sentencing, so that a 15-year prison sentence means 
just that--15 years, and not 5 years or 10 years? Nothing does more to 
shatter public confidence in our system of criminal justice than the 
sight of a convicted violent criminal, released from prison into our 
communities, the beneficiary of a liberal parole policy.
  Will the conference endorse tough mandatory minimum sentences for 
those who use a gun in the commission of a crime? And will it adopt a 
comprehensive three-strikes-and-you're-out provision that is not 
strapped with so many conditions and caveats, that it becomes virtually 
meaningless?
  Madam President, when it comes to fighting crime, the American people 
do not want gimmicks. They want--and they deserve--tough, hard-headed 
solutions.
  That is why this Senator is prepared to vote against any conference 
report that does not meet the tough-on-crime test: Substantial funding 
for prisons, a strong emphasis on truth-in-sentencing, no Racial 
Justice Act, including any compromise version, and a commitment to 
mandatory minimum sentences for violent criminals.

                          ____________________