[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 116 (Wednesday, August 17, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: August 17, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
           THE CRIME BILL: PREVENTION PROGRAMS ARE NECESSARY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from North Carolina [Mrs. Clayton] is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, as we debate the crime bill, it is 
critical not to lose sight of the purpose--to act upon the causes as 
well as the effects of crime.
  This crime bill is not a perfect bill and there are things in this 
bill that I do not support--such as the 50 additional death penalty 
offenses, the three strikes and you're out; and the omission of the 
Racial Justice Act. But in spite of these limitations this bill has 
value for the American people and their communities; it includes law 
enforcement, jail construction, stricter sentencing, and prevention 
resources.
  Some of my colleagues would have you believe that the only way to 
fight crime is to build more jails and more jails. We do need more 
jails and at the rate we are preventing crime--we will need many more 
jails, more jails than the Federal budget can support.
  It is all well and good to spend the taxpayer dollars upon 
construction programs for additional prison space nationwide to house 
those already convicted of a crime. However, some on the other side of 
the aisle would have you think that all prevention programs are pork, 
frivolous and unnecessary, but why should prisons be the only 
beneficiaries of the Federal funding appropriated through this 
legislation?
  I do not believe that tack to be in the best interest of the Nation. 
The cost-benefit analysis reflects that the smart and prudent 
legislator should support prevention programs because they give the 
most bang for your buck. It costs the State of North Carolina over 
$24,000 a year to incarcerate a prisoner while it costs the Federal 
Government over $20,000 dollars per year to incarcerate a prisoner--
that $20,000 is more effectively spent, I feel, in efforts to keep our 
youth from becoming criminals in the first place through educational 
programs, training programs, after school programs, boot camps, and 
recreational programs, including basketball leagues during the day as 
well as the evening.
  Given the rate of construction jails--that seven billion dollars 
designed for prevention only goes so far--it will only pay to 
incarcerate 350,000 people--a finite number--the funds, if spent on 
prevention programs, have the potential to reach millions more of 
Americans--as well as to make them productive members of society, free, 
contributing to their Nation--not in jail, supported by society. Thus, 
I believe it is in our Nation's best interest to reach out and help as 
many young people as we can, and that is through prevention programs.
    
    
  Ms. FURSE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Mrs. CLAYTON. I yield to the gentlewoman from Oregon.
  Ms. FURSE. Mr. speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, yesterday I looked into the eyes of two people whose 
loved ones were gunned down by a madman with an assault weapon. Mr. 
Speaker, we need a strong crime bill.
  I would like to ask people: Do not listen to the talk-show hosts. 
What do they know about law enforcement? What do they know about crime 
prevention? Do what I do, talk to the experts, the police chiefs, the 
sheriffs of the First District of Oregon. They support this crime bill. 
Listen to those who dedicate their lives to protecting our communities.
  I ask my colleagues, let us not posture on this bill. Let us 
legislate. That is what we are paid to do.

                          ____________________