[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 118 (Friday, August 19, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: August 19, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                   OMNIBUS CRIME CONTROL ACT OF 1994

  (Mr. BILIRAKIS asked and was given permission to address the House 
for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks and include 
extraneous matter.)
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, contrary to what some have been saying 
about it in the past few days, the crime bill presented to Members last 
week didn't fool the law enforcement community in Florida, according to 
an article in Wednesday's St. Petersburg Times, which I am entering 
into today's Record along with this statement.
  The Times reported that interviews with more than a dozen senior law 
enforcement officials revealed ``considerable doubts and even more 
ambivalence toward the bill.''
  The Pinellas-Pasco State attorney noted that ``there is just so much 
fluff in there * * * it's hard to get excited about it.''
  The president of the Florida Sheriff's Association--which hasn't even 
discussed the bill at its meetings--said it was packed with ``feel-
good, look-good'' social programs that are a waste of tax dollars. One 
sheriff doesn't agree with the hiring of 100,000 officers. He said his 
deputies are arresting the same offenders over and over again, but have 
nowhere to put them. He said ``prison beds are more important.''
  One police chief noted that ``the politicians are more interested in 
seeing who can be the toughest on crime rather than trying to solve the 
problems.''
  These people know the score, Mr. Speaker, they put their lives on the 
line every day. Let's get serious around here and put together a crime 
bill that is not a crime itself.

             [From the St. Petersburg Times, Aug. 17, 1994]

            Police, Sheriff Officials Are Cool to Crime Bill

                           (By David Barstow)

       Look at all the goodies for Florida: $410-million to hire 
     new cops. Another $380-million for prisons. At least $200-
     million for crime prevention.
       It's all there, tucked away in President Clinton's massive 
     $33-billion crime bill. And it's all at stake this week as 
     Clinton fights to rescue what he calls the ``toughest, 
     largest'' crime bill ever written.
       The bill suffered a key defeat last week with several 
     surprise ``no'' votes coming from Florida representatives. 
     Yet state and local law enforcement officials--in theory 
     Clinton's natural allies--are silent as tombstones at this 
     most crucial of junctures.
       They're not lobbying for it.
       They're not losing sleep over it.
       They're not even sure it'll do that much good.
       There's never been a federal crime bill since I've been in 
     the system that's made a hill of beans of difference,'' said 
     Pinellas-Pasco State Attorney Bernie McCabe.
       ``There's just so much fluff in there. * * * It's hard to 
     get excited about it.''
       The Florida Sheriffs Association hasn't even discussed the 
     bill at its meetings. ``It doesn't really mean much to us,'' 
     said Harold Sample, executive assistant to Pasco Sheriff Lee 
     Cannon.
       Asked if he supported Clinton's crime bill, Pinellas 
     Sheriff Everett Rice said: ``I really don't know. I haven't 
     formed an opinion on it.''
       What's going on here? Isn't crime the No. 1 concern among 
     voters? Aren't police chiefs and sheriffs always pleading for 
     more cops? Wouldn't they be jumping through hoops of fire to 
     get their share of the bill's promised 100,000 new police 
     officers?
       Well, no. Interviews with more than a dozen senior law 
     enforcement officials in the Tamps Bay area this week 
     revealed considerable doubts and even more ambivalence toward 
     the bill. And if their lukewarm responses are any indication, 
     Clinton's task in rescuing the bill will not be easy.
       Take Hillsborough Sheriff Cal Henderson. He's a Democrat, 
     and he likes much of what's in the bill. But he does not 
     agree with its centerpiece--those 100,000 officers. That's 
     simply not the No. 1 priority right now, he said.
       ``And I'm not in the minority in saying that. * * * At this 
     point the more important thing is the prison beds and 
     (juvenile) detention facilities.''
       His deputies are arresting the same offenders over and over 
     and over, he said. More deputies means more arrests, but no 
     real change, he said. No real impact.
       ``Give me a break,'' said Manatee Sheriff Charlie Wells, a 
     Republican. ``A 100,000 police to arrest people to put `em 
     where? To put 'em where?''
       Wells knows the bill contains billions for new prisons. But 
     if he were Clinton, he would take every cent of that money 
     for the 100,000 police officers and put it all into drug 
     treatment and prison beds, he said.
       And this is a sheriff talking.
       There's another reason local police officials aren't 
     scrambling over each other for Clinton's 100,000 officers. 
     Yes, the federal government would help pay for the officers. 
     But only for a few years. Then it's up to local governments 
     to pay their full salaries and benefits.
       That's what frightens Terry Chapman, acting police chief of 
     the Brooksville Police Department, which employs 17 police 
     officers on a budget of a little more than $1-million.
       Sure, he would love to get a piece of the $8.8-billion set 
     aside for those 100,000 new officers. Just three more 
     officers would allow him to beef up his department's 
     community policing efforts.
       ``But you're looking at $90,000 a year for three officers. 
     You add $90,000 on your budget and now you've created a 
     severe problem,'' he said. ``We're working on a very, very 
     tight budget.''
       So tight that he can't see asking his City Council for 
     those three new officers. ``They put these big numbers out, 
     these big figures, but people don't realize the hidden costs 
     of these grants.''
       Darrel Stephens has the same problems as Chapman, only on a 
     larger scale. He is chief of the St. Petersburg Police 
     Department. Last year, his department applied for a federal 
     grant to hire 18 more officers for community policing. The 
     department didn't get the money. Under Clinton's crime bill, 
     it probably would.
       But Stephens said he's not certain he will resubmit the 
     application even if the bill becomes law. Not because he no 
     longer needs the 18 officers. It's just that he's not sure 
     the city can afford to pick up the long-term costs of the new 
     officers--about $900,000 a year.
       ``That's a problem.''
       There are other problems. For many police officials here, 
     the headline-grabbing elements of the bill have little, if 
     anything, to do with local crime rates. For example, the bill 
     would greatly expand the number of federal crimes for which 
     the death penalty could be used. Big deal, they say. When was 
     the last time your local police made an arrest for hijacking 
     an airplane?
       And this: ``The federal government has had a death penalty 
     all along, but I haven't seen 'em executing anyone,'' McCabe 
     said.
       Another controversial provision of the bill would ban 19 
     types of assault weapons. Trouble is, there aren't many 
     crimes committed in the Tampa Bay area with assault weapons.
       ``In Manatee County there's never been a person murdered 
     with an assault weapon--and I've checked,'' said Wells.
       ``The politicians are more interested in seeing who can be 
     the toughest on crime rather than trying to solve the 
     problems,'' Stephens complained. Still, he is disappointed 
     the crime bill has faltered. For one, he has heard that his 
     department stands to collect $1.3-million of the bill's $7.4-
     billion in crime prevention money. Yet even Stephens has 
     largely stayed on the sidelines of the political battle over 
     the bill. Other than a phone call to the office of U.S. Rep. 
     C.W. Bill Young, an Indian Rocks Beach Republican, Stephens 
     has not lobbied local delegates.
       Tampa police Chief Bennie R. Holder, another supporter of 
     the bill and a Democrat to boot, hasn't lobbied Florida's 
     delegation either. But then, his department already secured a 
     federal grant to hire 30 community policing officers.
       Wells, a Republican, is president of the Florida Sheriffs 
     Association, which decided not to take a position on the 
     crime bill.
       He said the association would have backed the bill, but 
     then the politicians packed it with ``feel-good look-good'' 
     social programs that are a waste of tax dollars. Like the 
     $40-million in the bill to sponsor midnight basketball 
     leagues for kids.
       ``Why do I need the president of the United States telling 
     me I need midnight basketball?'' Wells asked.
       ``They convoluted a perfectly good bill. Even the Democrats 
     among the sheriffs, they aren't pushing for it.''
       So what will Wells do if the bill passes? Will he ask for 
     more deputies? Will he try for some of that basketball money?
       Wells chuckled: ``If this passes, I'll be right there with 
     my hands out just like everyone else.''

                          ____________________