[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 34 (Thursday, February 23, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E413-E414]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                         CRIME BILL EDITORIALS

                                 ______


                           HON. DOUG BEREUTER

                              of nebraska

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, February 23, 1995

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member wishes to commend two recent 
editorials regarding H.R. 728, the Local Government Law Enforcement 
Block Grants Act, to his colleagues. Editorials from Omaha World Herald 
and the Lincoln Journal support the House-passed local government block 
grant program over the grant programs in the 1994 crime control bill 
that would provide money for the COPS program and other specific grant 
programs.
  According to the Lincoln Journal editorial from February 20, 1995:

       . . . When Congress passed a crime bill with a 100,000 
     officer component last year, dozens 
        [[Page E414]] of Nebraska communities, including Lincoln, 
     rushed forward to grab the first round of grants and cash in 
     on the chance to add people to their police forces. President 
     Clinton, sensing that 100,00 is still a magic and marvelously 
     symbolic number, has chosen to make it the centerpiece of his 
     first veto threat. Tinker with that portion of the crime 
     bill, he is warning Republicans who are all too anxious to do 
     just that, and bipartisanship will go by the boards.
       The Journal is certainly interested to hear the news that 
     the President is--apparently--prepared to make one of his few 
     firm stands. But the Journal is not interested in seeing him 
     issue a veto for the sake of a single number--even a six-
     figure number.
       In this case, it is the Republicans who have the better 
     plan. They want to let states and individual communities 
     decide how to take a bite out of crime. They want to 
     distribute money and leave the decision at the local level as 
     to whether it will be spent directly on more police officers 
     or on some other crime efforts that are regarded as more 
     effective.
       It make sense for a variety of reasons, including 
     flexibility. In a metropolitan setting, the oft-maligned idea 
     of midnight basketball might actually offer more help in 
     crime prevention. In cities like Lincoln, where community 
     policing is much in vogue, it might make more sense to spend 
     it on a satellite police station or some need that is closely 
     aligned with community policing.
       It is also important ton note that the Federal commitment 
     to putting more police on the street does not extent to 
     training or equipment and that it is only good for three 
     years. After that, as it appears now, grant recipients would 
     be left to stand the entire cost of however many personnel 
     they hire.

  The second editorial is from the February 17, 1995, Omaha World 
Herald.
                 No False Promises in House Crime Plan

       President Clinton has been in a huff over congressional 
     efforts to redesign the crime bill he signed into law in 
     1994. The president says he will veto any attempt to 
     dismantle a program that promised to put 100,000 police 
     officers on the streets.
       However, Clinton's claim that the $8.8 billion allocated by 
     Congress for that purpose would actually finance that many 
     officers has always been suspect. City officials in Omaha and 
     a number of other places soon discovered that Congress had 
     attached so many strings to the money that applying for it 
     was in some cases impractical.
       For one thing, cities can't add even one officer unless 
     they put up their own money first--25 percent of the total. 
     The federal funding runs out after five years. Moreover, law 
     enforcement experts said the $8.8 billion wouldn't come close 
     to covering the cost of hiring, training and equipping 
     100,000 officers without forcing communities to come up with 
     still more of their own money. By some accounts, the federal 
     money would pay for closer to 20,000 new officers.
       The House has now voted to cancel $7.5 billion in unspent 
     funds for the police buildup. Also canceled would be $3.9 
     billion in unspent funds for social programs that the 
     previous Congress had included under the heading of ``crime 
     prevention.'' Instead, the House proposes $10 billion in 
     block grants to the states. States and cities could design 
     their own anti-crime programs.
       Clinton has been adamant about preserving the 100,000-
     officer program. But the House idea is better. It makes no 
     false promises. And it takes government another step away 
     from the idea that Big Brother in Washington knows more about 
     fighting crime than the mayors and police chiefs who are 
     engaged in that fight every day.
     

                          ____________________