[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 124 (Friday, July 28, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1556]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



[[Page E 1556]]


 THE 1996 COMMERCE, JUSTICE, STATE AND THE JUDICIARY APPROPRIATIONS ACT

                                 ______


                            HON. RON PACKARD

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                          Friday, July 28, 1995

  Mr. PACKARD. Mr. Speaker, President Clinton has declared his 
intention to veto the 1996 commerce, Justice, State, and the Judiciary 
Appropriations Act. May I say how saddened I am that the President has 
chosen to act in this way. By vetoing this bill President Clinton is 
putting the interests of his party above the interests of the Nation
  Such an action, while not out of character, is nevertheless 
surprising considering the overwhelming benefits of this bill. The bill 
gives more money toward law enforcement, including the INS, who receive 
a 20 percent increase in desperately needed funds, than any bill ever 
passed in Congress. How can the President be willing to jeopardize the 
safety of every American citizen just because his own anti-crime 
program has been scraped in favor of new initiatives that allow States 
and local Communities greater flexibility in tackling crime on their 
streets? Stalling over Medicare and thus endangering the health of our 
senior citizens is bad enough, but now, by threatening to veto the 
Commerce, Justice, State, and Judiciary appropriations bill, President 
Clinton is risking the lives of all Americans. What we the Republicans 
have always feared is true; the President is more concerned with his 
own agenda than the fate of the American people.
  The 1996 Commerce, Justice, State, and Judiciary Appropriations Act 
represents a major new initiative in fighting crime. It rejects the old 
tried and failed attempts to impose solutions from above, solutions 
that do not, and cannot, take the specific needs and difficulties of 
local communities into account. By providing States with Block grants, 
States can still use the money to hire more police if they want, but 
they can also choose to buy equipment, start prevention programs, 
improve training--whatever they think will be most effective. This bill 
takes money out of the hands of Government bureaucrats and puts it into 
the hands of those who are fighting the war against crime on the front 
lines. It recognizes that the Federal Government does not always know 
best. When will President Clinton realize the same and how many more 
will have to suffer until he does?


                          ____________________