[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 127 (Monday, September 16, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10578-S10579]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            CRIME IN AMERICA

  Mr. COVERDELL. I thank the Senator from Michigan. Again, as I said 
when he came to the floor, he has been very dutiful on this issue and I 
am comfortable will ultimately prevail.
  Mr. President, a moment ago I was talking about this drug epidemic. 
There can be no doubt but that we had a change in policies that 
occurred when this administration took office. And we have had a 
resulting change in behavior. If you start shutting the drug war down, 
I think you can expect to see a reversal and we will find more and more 
young people caught up in this tragic problem and then society caught 
up in their problems.
  This administration has, as we just heard, vulnerability and 
accountability that it has to accept with regard to the condition of 
crime in the country today. This administration has touted signing the 
assault weapon ban and Brady bill as evidence that they got tough on 
guns. This has been the effect: Federal gun prosecutions are down 20 
percent. Federal gun convictions are down 13 percent. The U.S. 
attorneys' program to target gun crimes and to report on gun 
prosecutions, Operation Triggerlock, which the Senator from Mississippi 
talked about a moment ago, has been dismantled--gone. Congress 
authorized $200 million for States to help with background checks under 
the Brady bill. Clinton's budget request has cut that figure by 68 
percent. ``It is fine to pass the bill, but do not fund it.''
  This administration claims to have put 100,000-plus cops on the 
streets. Myself and Senator Biden, the Senator from Delaware, debated 
that number a couple of months ago. The data is actually this: The 
Justice Department says the number is actually more like 17,000. Now, 
17,000 is a long way from 100,000. It is questionable whether 17,000 
have ended up there as well. In Florida, 30 of this 17,000--not 100,000 
but 17,000. In the ads we hear 100,000, but in reality it is more like 
17,000. Here is where some of the 17,000 are: They were added to the 
State Department of Environmental Protection to keep watch over a coral 
sanctuary off the Florida Keys. The cost of that was $3.5 million.

  Florida received $1.8 million to hire 25 cops for State parks. At the 
same time, Florida received $3.5 million to watch a coral reef. This 
Justice Department rejected a request from the St. Augustine police 
department, in northern Florida, to fund a 1-year anti-domestic 
violence program. That would have cost $80,000, to hire this officer. 
In other words, we do not have 100,000, we have 17,000; and of the 
17,000 we have, we have them watching a coral reef off the Florida Keys 
but denying the ability to set up an antidomestic violence program. 
This is almost as baffling as some of the statistics that we heard from 
the Senator from Michigan.
  The Justice Department admits that, of that number, as many as 14,000 
were already on the streets and are now just paid for with Federal tax 
dollars. Mr. President, 20 percent of the 100,000 may be officers who 
are redeployed. So the early money has gone to existing police 
officers. In reality, only about 3,000 new cops have been added. That 
is a long way from the 100,000 to 3,000.
  Mr. President, we have been joined by the senior Senator from 
Oklahoma, the assistant majority leader. He is a strong proponent of 
crime measures that work. I yield up to 8 minutes to the Senator from 
Oklahoma.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, first, I would like to compliment the 
Senator from Georgia for his leadership on calling to our attention 
both Senator Dole's initiative to combat crime, which I think has some 
outstanding points that need to be brought to the public attention and 
public debate, and also some of the shortcomings we have witnessed 
through action or inaction from the Clinton administration for the last 
3\1/2\ years.
  First and foremost in the effort to combat crime, I think we have to 
combat the rapid rise in drug use amongst teenagers. Teenagers are our 
country's future, and it is very, very sad indeed to see that drug use 
amongst teenagers in the last 3\1/2\ years has more than doubled. That 
is a frightening statistic. It may be one of the most frightening 
statistics we could think of. Some of us are parents. I happen to have 
four kids. To think that drug use has more than doubled in just 3\1/2\ 
years should cause everybody, Democrat, Republican, independent, real 
cause for concern.
  You might say why? Some people point a finger at President Clinton. I 
think he shares some of the blame. I remember very well Nancy Reagan 
and her effort to say, ``Just say no to drugs.'' Try to convince young 
people to, ``Just say no. Do not mess with them, do not experiment with 
them, you are on thin ice, you are asking for trouble and you can start 
down the road beginning with marijuana and maybe ending up with more 
serious drugs, cocaine, crack and others, that can destroy your life.''
  Some people have ridiculed Nancy Reagan's statement. But as a result 
of her efforts and those continued by President and Mrs. Bush, drug use 
continued to decline throughout their administrations. We had a 10-year 
decline in drug use among young people; and basically among all age 
groups, drug use declined.
  Unfortunately, in the last 3\1/2\ years drug use among teenagers more 
than doubled. And what kind of leadership did we have from the White 
House? We had President Clinton making light of the fact that he had 
broken our drug laws. He said he did not break the drug laws, he said 
he never inhaled, not in this country, that was in England and, ``No, I 
never inhaled.'' Then last year, on a nationally televised show, I 
think it was MTV, when he was asked the question by a youngster, 
``Would you inhale if you had a chance to do that again?'' he said yes. 
What kind of example is that? What kind of leadership is that? That is 
a frivolous attitude, as if it does not really make any difference. 
That kind of cavalier attitude, I think, tells a lot of people, maybe 
it is OK to use drugs or try drugs; President Clinton tried drugs.
  Then you see in the President's own administration, several people 
could not get White House clearance through the FBI because they had 
recent drug use. Not 10 years ago, not 20 years ago when they were in 
their early twenties or something, but recent drug use. Mr. Aldrich's 
book indicated that there was drug use even possibly on Inaugural

[[Page S10579]]

Day. Yet, some of those people are serving in the White House today. I 
believe it is acknowledged by the White House, 21 current employees, 
top-level officials in the White House are currently undergoing a drug 
program, a drug rehab program and surveillance.

  What kind of example is that? What kind of leadership is that? And 
what about some of the appointments that President Clinton has made?
  I remember we had a big battle over Dr. Joycelyn Elders to be Surgeon 
General. A lot of us, mostly Republicans, said, no, she would not be 
the proper person to be the Surgeon General, to be the No. 1 health 
officer appointed by the President, to be the person in the bully 
pulpit, because she had views that were more than liberal, they were 
off the radar screen to the left.
  Many of us opposed her nomination, but she was confirmed. We opposed 
her nomination because she made a lot of statements that we felt should 
not be made by the Surgeon General.
  After Dr. Elders was appointed, it wasn't too long before she said 
something about, ``Well, maybe we should legalize drugs, maybe we 
should study legalizing drugs.'' Did President Clinton fire her for 
that statement? No. I think I heard somebody say, ``Well, the President 
doesn't agree with her on that issue.''
  It wasn't a month later and she said the same thing, I think before 
the National Press Club. She thought maybe we should consider 
legalizing drugs. Was she fired for making it a second time? The answer 
is no. She was fired later for making some other comments that were, 
again, very irresponsible in what we should be teaching our kids in 
school, but the point being is he didn't fire her. She made several 
comments about legalizing drugs, and she was still the Surgeon General, 
she was still President Clinton's appointee to a very important 
prestigious position. Again, he was aware of her background, he was 
aware of her philosophy, and yet that was his recommendation to the 
country for that position.
  My point being, the war on drugs needs to be fought. It was fought 
under Ronald Reagan, it was fought under George Bush, and, basically, 
it was abandoned under the Clinton administration. The net result is, 
we have a lot of young people today who are experimenting with drugs, 
thinking, ``Well, maybe it's OK.'' So we see drug use way up, we see 
the number of young people who will be addicts, who will see their 
lives ruined, we will see those numbers go up as well.
  So we need to fight the war on crime, we need to fight the war on 
drugs, but, unfortunately, this administration has been AWOL on both. 
Mr. President, I regret to say that, I hate to say that.
  Mr. President, I am going to make a couple more comments. I looked at 
Senator Dole's announcement. He said he had a stated goal that he wants 
to reduce drug use by 50 percent during his first term. It can be done. 
It was done under Reagan and Bush. It can be done again. You see the 
current upsurge in drug use due to a very cavalier attitude by this 
administration, the current administration, on the war on drugs. It 
will be nice to have a change in the White House and have an individual 
and a team that is very committed, that is very dedicated, very sincere 
in saying, ``We want to let everyone know that drugs are hazardous to 
your health.''
  I find it interesting to see that President Clinton is attacking 
tobacco and has been silent about other drugs, such as crack and 
cocaine, marijuana use. I almost think that he made the announcement on 
tobacco maybe to kind of get this release of information talking about 
drug use doubling under his term off the front pages. I don't know.
  Mr. President, this war has to be fought. We need energetic 
leadership coming from the White House. I believe we will have that 
from Senator Dole and his team.
  Also, I want to comment on the interdiction efforts. I remember 
shortly after President Clinton took office, he cut the office of the 
drug czar by 83 percent. He reduced it from, I believe, 140 employees 
to 15, and cut the funding way back. That tells you something about his 
priorities.

  Senator Dole said, if elected, he would reestablish the drug czar 
office. He would redouble and rekindle our efforts on drug interdiction 
so we can stop drugs before they come into the United States. He said 
he would increase penalties on those people who have been involved in 
drug trafficking, particularly amongst people who have been involved in 
drug trafficking to our young people.
  So, Mr. President, it is vitally important that we have a leader who 
will make change, and make change appropriately, to protect our kids 
for the future.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. COVERDELL addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, our control of time is nearing an end, 
but I would like to just draw a contrast here.
  The former majority leader has embraced a very focused attack on 
crime in our country, and he begins--and I think it is appropriate--
with the first pledge to cut teen drug use in half. I can't think of a 
grander thing to achieve that would do more good, reduce pain and 
anxiety and trouble in millions of American families.

  Sometimes these numbers get out of whack. We are talking about a 
sister, a brother, somebody in the neighborhood, and we are talking 
about 2 million of them who are now experimenting with drugs who did 
not 3 years ago. That is a city the size of my hometown, Atlanta, GA--
every person in it. Every one of those is a family and is in a personal 
crisis. So by focusing that as No. 1 is right on target.
  No. 2, an end to revolving-door-justice, which Americans have been so 
concerned about. One in every three persons arrested for a violent 
crime is on parole. Sometimes people say, ``Well, it costs too much to 
keep them in prison, $25,000, $30,000 a year.'' It costs $450,000 for 
them to be out of prison, in property damage and personal damage.
  No. 3, holding violent juveniles accountable for their actions. We 
all know we have a juvenile crime wave and it is tied to the drug wave.
  No. 4, making prisoners work. Only one-third of the prisoners work 
full time. We heard the Senator from Michigan addressing that.
  No. 5, keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.
  On target, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
  Conversely, this administration suffers from a lack of commitment in 
this arena. Shortly after arriving at her job, Attorney General Janet 
Reno repealed the Department of Justice policy requiring prosecutors to 
seek the most serious criminal charge they could prove in court. We all 
heard from the Senator from Oklahoma about the former Surgeon General 
suggesting that maybe we should legalize drugs and the effect that has 
had, with children no longer thinking that drugs are serious.
  This administration's chief prosecutor in San Diego has released 
hundreds of captured drug smugglers and sent them back to Mexico 
without prosecuting. This administration's prosecutors across the 
country have cut back prosecutions of felons for possessing guns by 13 
percent and have reduced prosecution for crimes involving guns 20 to 25 
percent.
  Many of this administration's judges have embraced the criminal as a 
victim-of-society philosophy. The Senator from Montana talked about 
that earlier this afternoon and how wrong that is. We heard the 
statistics of getting these people back out on the street and the price 
society pays when we do that.
  His appointees to the Supreme Court have been among the most willing 
to use technicalities to overturn death sentences for brutal murders.
  The list goes on, Mr. President. Here we have a focused, energetic, 
committed Senator Dole targeting crime as a No. 1 issue in America and 
going after it, and over here we have a record of conciliation and a 
drug war and a drug epidemic.
  We need to do this not only for the stability of our country, but for 
the compassion of our children.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________