[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 29 (Tuesday, February 14, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H1697-H1698]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           SUPPORT CRIME BILL

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 4, 1995, the gentleman from California [Mr. Dreier] is 
recognized during morning business for 5 minutes.
  (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I have taken this time this morning to focus 
attention on the issue which will be debated later this morning when we 
actually convene, and that is the crime bill. We have spent time 
talking about five different crime measures which have been designed to 
redress the problems of the 1994 crime bill. Yesterday and today we 
were working on the sixth measure.
  When I was working on the rule down here yesterday, Mr. Speaker, I 
was talking about the fact that I am hard-pressed to understand why 
this sixth measure is the most controversial of all. This morning on 
NPR they talked about the fact that it was controversial. I know 
Chairman Hyde said it was controversial based on the fact that in the 
Committee on the Judiciary a wide range of members of the minority 
raised serious questions about it.
  The reason I say it is difficult to understand why it is 
controversial is very simply that we in making that statement are 
questioning the ability of State and local elected officials, people 
who are elected by the same constituents who elect us, were questioning 
their ability to make the very tough decisions that each community 
faces as it relates to crime.
  I have the privilege of representing a portion of Los Angeles County, 
and we have very serious crime problems in Southern California stemming 
from illegal immigration and a wide range of other problems that 
frankly are unique to southern California.
  In the 1994 crime bill, Mr. Speaker, we were promised 100,000 new 
police officers, and virtually everyone has said that we would be very 
fortunate if we were in that period of time to possibly get 20,000 
police officers. Yet the President continues to refer to 100,000 police 
officers.
  It seems to me that we need to allow State and local officials the 
opportunity to make the tough decisions as to how they can best deal 
with the crime problems in their communities, and it is my hope that we 
will listen to those State and local elected officials, just as we 
listened to them when we dealt with the unfunded mandates legislation.
  Yesterday I quoted one of my city managers, a Democrat who strongly 
supported the 1994 crime bill. He urged me to vote for it back last 
fall, and I did not. Now he has come forward and said I was correct in 
not supporting that, and he hoped very much that we will be able to 
pass this measure which will provide the block grants allowing 
[[Page H1698]] State and local officials the opportunity to make the 
tough decisions that are before them.
  I hope we can pass this bill out today, Mr. Speaker, and finally 
begin to turn the corner on this very serious public policy problem.


                          ____________________