[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 49 (Wednesday, April 23, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H1781-H1786]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               OUR RIGHT TO SAFETY AND FREEDOM FROM FEAR

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sununu). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 7, 1997, the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Hulshof] is 
recognized for 60 minutes.
  Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, once again the 32 newly-elected Republican 
Members of this body have sought a special order of this House to focus 
on issues that affect the lives of Americans all across this great 
land.
  We have, as Members know, in the past explored positive solutions to 
problems that affect American communities. We have addressed the issues 
and concerns of working men and women as they struggle to juggle family 
commitments along with their careers. We have spoken, I think last week 
it was, about enacting real tax relief.
  Mr. Speaker, tonight we want to train the spotlight of this House and 
focus on an issue of concern to every man and every woman and every 
child in this great land. What I am speaking about is the most basic 
civil right that each of us possesses: the right to be free from fear, 
the right to be able to drive to a convenience store in safety, the 
right to take a leisurely stroll through our neighborhoods, holding 
hands with our spouses, without concern; the right to let our kids play 
outside in the front yard without having to constantly keep watch over 
them.
  Mr. Speaker, before joining this body after the November election, I 
worked for a little over 10 years as a criminal prosecutor in the State 
of Missouri. Along with many hardworking law enforcement officials from 
our great State, I had the opportunity to work on the front lines, 
dealing with crime and crime victims. I have cried with family members 
as they have had to deal with the horrific tragedy visited upon them by 
some violent criminal. We have held hands as we have waited for the 
verdict of 12 impartial people.
  I have relived with those victims of violent crime some pretty 
horrific tragedies, like the young father who was murdered in front of 
his two young children. In one of the most selfless acts that I can 
think of, he was begging not for his life, not for his own safety, but 
for the lives of his two kids. Yet his pleas fell on the deaf ears of 
the murderer, who was ultimately convicted.
  Or there were the two juveniles who were on a crime spree, and chose 
to murder the two security guards that came down to investigate this 
routine theft. The stories and tragedies across this country are too 
many to mention. I do not need to mention, Mr. Speaker, how strongly I 
feel for the victims of violent crime.
  Of course, last week we had the opportunity to visit back in our 
districts and promote National Victims' Rights Week. Fortunately, I 
think in the last Congress, in earlier Congresses, we have done some 
things to begin making some inroads, to make sure that victims are 
equal partners in the criminal justice system along with those who are 
accused of these heinous crimes.
  For instance, in the last Congress, restitution for victims was 
required in Federal courts. In fact, earlier in this Congress we passed 
a law to help protect crime victims' rights to attend the trial of 
their assailants and to provide victim impact testimony, which passed 
this House by a large, overwhelming number. In fact, I am told that the 
President has signed that measure into law, and it is now the current 
law of this land.
  We have much work to do, however. What we hope to do, Mr. Speaker, is 
focus a few minutes this evening on this issue. Particularly, I know 
that there are members of the Republican freshman class who have been 
champions in the area of victims' rights. I know there are others of us 
who wish to speak tonight about a specific problem dealing with drugs 
in our communities, as well as violent juvenile offenders.
  In fact, I see that my friend, the gentleman from New Jersey, joins 
me here in the well of the House. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield to 
the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pappas].
  Mr. PAPPAS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, 
and I want to thank him once again for organizing this special order 
that we are doing each week that we are in session, to highlight an 
area of public policy that is of concern to you and to many of us here, 
and to talk about some of the experiences that we have had in our own 
respective districts and States.
  The debate here this evening, or the discussion here this evening, is 
really aimed at trying to create a better America, and to help many 
families within our districts and certainly within our country. For 
many of us, it is obvious that if we do not pay some attention to this, 
the future for many people in our country is not going to be what it 
certainly should be. The young people of our Nation are the future. 
They are the future doctors, teachers, businessmen and businesswomen, 
and yes, even future Members of this Congress.

  Juvenile crime for many people is the result of substance abuse. In 
speaking to teachers, youth group leaders from various religious 
institutions throughout my State and district, that has been confirmed 
for me.
  I recently saw a study that had gotten the opinion of police chiefs 
around the country, and they believed, or 31 percent of them believe, 
that reducing substance abuse, specifically narcotic abuse, would be a 
very positive step in reducing the crime rate. For many of these police 
chiefs, reducing drug abuse was three times as crucial as putting more 
police officers on the street. That that was certainly something that 
raised my eyebrows.
  I know that many of our colleagues here probably saw an article in 
many of the newspapers, even here in Washington, DC, within the last 
couple of days, in which two teenagers from my State in Sussex County, 
the northern part of New Jersey, lured and then killed two pizza 
delivery people.
  I just read an article today in one of our major newspapers in our 
State, in the Star Ledger, that both suspects in this slaying had a 
history of drug abuse, and perhaps this brutal crime could have been 
prevented if these two people had not begun using drugs.
  I would like to quote from the Star Ledger article. One of the 
alleged perpetrators' grandmother was interviewed, and she said, and I 
will quote in part, ``This young man was transformed in the past 2 
months through drug use.'' This change was radical, and she was 
speaking of his demeanor, how it changed, and that he had, among other 
things, tremendous mood swings. Obviously she is very upset about not 
just what took place to these two young people who were killed, but 
also what drugs did in changing her grandson.
  In New Jersey, though, for several years our Governor has established 
the Council on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse, and we have really seen it 
make a difference. What it does is it establishes in each of our 21 
counties in our State an alliance which is made up of people from 
county government, municipal government, people from the religious 
community, youth organizations, education, labor, business, many 
nonprofit, volunteer organizations.
  What they have done, which is somewhat unique even for New Jersey, is 
meet to determine what is their need in their respective community, and 
how can that need best be addressed. There is some government funding 
that

[[Page H1782]]

is provided, but there is also a requirement that there be some fund-
raising at the local level to help pay for these, which in most 
instances are education and prevention programs.
  Some of the programs that have been sponsored include drug-free 
graduation parties or proms, poster contests, in-school training 
sessions on the danger of drugs, and preventative programs for all age 
categories. I might say that some of the communities have even selected 
programs to target senior citizens, because in many people's view there 
are many senior citizens in our country that have substance abuse 
problems.
  The focus of this particular program is in education and prevention, 
not so much on treatment, not that that is not an appropriate avenue 
for funding, but there are many detoxification services and halfway 
houses that are already in existence and are funded in many instances 
from other avenues.
  Over the course of our Gov. Christy Whitman's first term in office, 
juvenile arrests in New Jersey have actually declined overall by 5 
percent, and juvenile arrests for violent crimes have dropped by 7 
percent. I believe that these community-based organizations that I have 
spoken about here are an important reason for this drop in crime.
  Another exciting initiative that was very successful in my home 
county of Somerset in New Jersey was the formation of the Somerset 
County Youth Council, which, when I was on our county board, asked 
principals, high school principals, private, parochial, as well as 
public, to recommend young people to come together, to meet maybe 4 
times a year, to advise the county government officials on programs 
they feel need to be addressed from the young people's perspective.
  That strategy has been very enthusiastically responded to by both the 
educational community as well as the young people. They have become 
involved in a wide variety of efforts, undertaken projects, such as 
trying to raise the consciousness of their peers to not even start to 
smoke, let alone get involved in alcohol and narcotics, and it has 
really been something that has been very, very positive.
  These young people have been asked to serve, and they have really 
stepped forward and run this program, which really is growing in its 
scope and in its breadth of involvement from people from all segments 
and all economic situations.
  Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman mentioned these young groups, 
and I would ask the gentleman, what age groups is he talking about that 
the coalition is reaching out to?
  Mr. PAPPAS. Junior high, middle schools, and up to high school.
  Mr. HULSHOF. It seems that especially the earlier that the education 
process can begin, once that foundation begins, you can really begin to 
build that foundation.
  I know recently just going back, I have had a chance to visit with 
the local elementary school in Missouri, the Luray Elementary School, 
very small, K through 8, with about 45 students, and yet they are very 
aware. In fact, when you walk into the school, the doormat there says 
``Don't do drugs.''

                              {time}  2130

  This constant educational process that helps young people realize 
that with every choice there comes a responsibility, it sounds like 
this is also working in your home district.
  Mr. PAPPAS. In conclusion, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I 
think what I spoke about, what we have done in New Jersey and what we 
did in my county, is to illustrate how one-size-fits-all approaches 
that too often Washington, DC, folks have felt is the way to go does 
not always work. It is not always the answer to all of the needs of the 
communities throughout our great country.
  I hope that initiatives that we have had, not just in New Jersey but 
really in many of our districts that are represented here tonight, will 
be reflected upon. I talk about some of the success stories that we 
have been involved with in central New Jersey, with the hope of 
encouraging other people to not necessarily feel they have to reinvent 
the wheel.
  I certainly look forward to learning of what positive things may have 
taken place in your district and in others and certainly take those 
ideas back home.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, I applaud the gentleman for his efforts. 
Hopefully his constituents know how hard he is working up here and that 
he is providing some great examples and success stories in central New 
Jersey.
  I see the gentleman from Colorado has joined us in the Chamber, and I 
yield to the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Bob Schaffer].
  Mr. BOB SCHAFFER of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding to me.
  I wanted to talk about a couple things that I think raise this issue 
and tell us why it is important this week and why we ought to focus on 
juvenile crime and the importance of this topic.
  There was a subcommittee hearing that just took place this last week, 
and some of the stories that that subcommittee had heard are some 
sobering facts. I want to go through a couple of those. There were a 
number of personal stories, just tragic, similar to the one that you 
mentioned just a few moments ago, but also just some numbers that I 
think really put this into perspective.
  First of all, when you realize that with the experts are telling us 
right now about the effect of what they call the echo boomers, the 
children of baby boomers that will be leaving their diapers behind and 
becoming teenagers very shortly, the experts tell us that nationwide we 
are likely to experience a 31 percent increase in juvenile crime by the 
year 2010. In that climate, the FBI predicts and has told us that 
juvenile arrests for murder will increase 145 percent over the 1992 
level, juvenile arrests for forcible rape by 66 percent, and juvenile 
arrests for aggravated assaulted by 129 percent.
  Those are estimates based on today's trends, but I know like you and 
the rest of the Members of this freshman class who are dedicated to 
changing those numbers and using the power of these podiums and our 
offices to try to give a new direction to these numbers and offer a 
brighter picture.
  Let me tell you about some of the problems that we face in America 
right now, why juvenile crime is something that is on increase. I would 
submit that it has an awful lot to do with the callous disregard for 
the issue that we see people in government and people in this Congress, 
I hate to admit, take toward juvenile crime and hopefully we can change 
that.
  The question is, what happens to juveniles once they are caught? What 
does the Government do at the State and local and Federal level as well 
to remedy the situation? Juvenile courts have seen their case load of 
violent juvenile offenders increase 98 percent between 1985 and 1994. 
The number of juvenile murders has actually tripled during that same 
time period. Juveniles 15 years and younger were responsible for 64 
percent of the violent offenses handled by juvenile courts in 1994. 
Almost half of all juveniles arrested for violent offenses received 
either probation or fine, restitution or community service. And nearly 
40 percent of those offenders who come in contact with the court system 
have their cases dismissed.
  These young children are not stupid. They may be foolish with respect 
to the crimes that they commit. I do not want to deny that. But when it 
comes to the odds of getting caught and getting prosecuted and 
strenuously so in this court system, these young children have figured 
out that the odds are in fact on their side and that we as Americans 
have tolerated far too much in the way of unruly behavior and 
discipline problems throughout the country and so on.
  Let me tell you a couple more disturbing statistics. The average 
length of institutionalization for a juvenile who has committed a 
violent crime is only 353 days. In other words, a juvenile who commits 
cold-blooded murder can be back on the streets in less than 1 year in 
many cases.
  According to the Justice Department, of those juveniles who actually 
make it to a State institution, 43 percent have had more than 5 prior 
arrests and 20 percent have been arrested more than 10 times. 
Approximately four-fifths of those offenders have previously been on 
probation and three-

[[Page H1783]]

fifths have been committed to a correctional facility at least once in 
the past.
  The next question obviously is, what can we do? What can we do to 
turn these terrifying numbers around? That is the job that is in front 
of us. That is something that I believe if we have the tenacity that 
brought us all here to Washington we can turn those numbers around.
  I would suggest that in many respects what we ought to do is not look 
to more and more government programs as the answer to preventing 
juvenile crime. Sometimes that is effective. But as the research begins 
to pile up and mount, it confronts us with the undeniable truth that 
spending millions and millions more of Federal and State and local 
funds on various youth related programs has not managed to turn these 
statistics around, not at all.
  I would suggest that just as the previous gentleman had mentioned 
that in some ways we need to look back to the future, programs that 
have worked well. It was Alexis de Tocqueville, the great observer of 
American democracy back in the earliest days, who observed that in 
America it was the private associations, the private institutions, the 
private charities and religious organizations that in fact had more to 
do with America's greatness than anything that the government was able 
to put together.
  Just a few examples, and I want to finish with just a brief comment 
about what is happening here in the District of Columbia.
  Look at these examples and I think it is our challenge to try to see 
what has worked and try to duplicate these examples.
  The Young Men's Christian Association, the YMCA, was established to 
combat urban crime. Seeing its mission as molding the moral character 
of the young,  the YMCA successfully undertook a struggle to win the 
hearts and minds of inner city youth, leading to a major drop in 
juvenile crime.

  In founding Georgetown University in 1792, Bishop John Carroll argued 
for the necessity of, ``a pious and Catholic education for the young.'' 
Carroll hoped that Georgetown's graduates would supply a pool of 
teachers for the Catholic schools of local parishes. Today those 
schools provide superior education, not only to the children of 
Catholic faith but to all faiths, and it has had just a tremendously 
important role to play in poor inner city parents seeking an 
alternative to public education.
  The Young Women's Christian Association gave a chaperoned place to 
live to young women migrating to the cities from rural areas. That 
stability immediately became available to those young women, permitting 
them to gradually find the community life in which they felt 
comfortable and safe fellowship after leaving their families and 
original communities.
  The Red Cross is another good example, a massive private sector 
organization which runs the world's largest blood collection and 
distribution systems as just one of its projects. The temperance 
movement in the mid-1800's, a response to the growing alcohol addiction 
of the time, resulted in massive reductions in alcohol consumption and 
a change of attitudes about alcohol abuse.
  I mention some of those examples because these were not inspired by 
government. They were inspired by private citizens, private 
associations who realize that the answer to crime and to just sad 
economic conditions for many millions of our youth at that point in 
time was not found in the halls of government but it was found in the 
halls of churches and schools and charitable organizations.
  I want to finish with one more sad story unfortunately. It is an 
event that took place right here in Washington, DC last week, and I 
mention this today because it does relate to this issue of juvenile 
crime and it is a topic that I hope to speak to in more detail next 
week.
  That is an event that took place a little over a week ago here in the 
District schools. In a fourth grade classroom here in Washington, an 
elementary school, nine fourth graders were allowed to be unobserved or 
unattended by their teacher in a holding room off to the side of the 
school room. These children engaged in some kind of sex game known as 
freaky Friday, as the Washington Post described the event, eventually 
were disrobed and engaged in sexual activity in a school building, a 
classroom in the District of Columbia. This is an important item to 
note for us here because the Constitution puts this Congress in charge 
of the District of Columbia.
  But at a time when we are wondering and in disbelief in many cases as 
to how young children in America can behave in many cases the way they 
do, we need to look no further than the examples that occur right here 
in Washington, DC, a good place to start, I would suggest, and as I 
mentioned, I hope to have a chance to discuss this a little more next 
week because we certainly have to focus on improving the quality of our 
public education system if we ever hope to get at a point where we 
really are challenging these young children, giving them real hope and 
opportunity.
  Let me finish just by saying this. By far the greater example is 
found within the many children and young people we have seen throughout 
the country who are achieving noble things, who are working hard, 
earning good grades, finding ways to be young entrepreneurs and being 
successful in their home towns.
  We see these examples all the time. They really do need to be 
celebrated. They need to be a component part to any solution that we 
try to craft here in Washington or policy direction that we pursue, and 
it is really those young children, who are on their ways to becoming 
worthwhile productive leaders and citizens in our country, that we need 
to embrace and that we need to celebrate and really look to them. I 
think they really are going to be the answer to the solutions that we 
are hunting for in reducing juvenile violence.
  Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, I always appreciate the gentleman from 
Colorado gracing us with his presence. I did not see any photographs 
tonight. I was waiting for the family portraits.
  Mr. BOB SCHAFFER of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, no juvenile offenders at 
home.
  Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman mentioned a good point. He 
started talking about statistics and what unfortunately we had to look 
forward to.
  In fact, I know that some who say that crime is not that much of a 
problem and that the statistics say that violent crime is going down, 
and they talk about government programs having worked, and yet why is 
it that none of us at least who work in this city, why do we not feel 
safe when we walk down the street?
  You mentioned another good point about the violent nature of the 
offenses being committed by younger and younger offenders. I have had a 
chance, again in my career as a prosecutor, I have had occasion in the 
last couple of years to visit with some of the older criminals in the 
prisons who are actually serving substantial sentences and visiting 
with them about why they are there and trying to find some solutions.
  One of the things that rang out was that these men and some women 
with extensive criminal resumes were most fearful of the youthful 
offenders who were just now being sentenced that they were having to be 
incarcerated with, that these were the ones that had a callous 
disregard for the difference between right and wrong.
  It was just extraordinary to hear these very grizzled criminals that 
expressed some concern and fear about the youthful offenders that they 
were having to share cells with.
  I know, as the gentleman has worked on the subcommittee, in the old 
days in, 1950's and 1960's, when our juvenile laws were first crafted 
and created across the country, a truancy was the most violent or 
aberrant behavior that we had to deal with. Now rape and murders and 
assaults and all other types of violent offenses.
  I know in the State of Missouri we have been very proactive, that we 
have held accountable those youthful offenders that commit adult crimes 
and holding them accountable as adults, while at the same time, as I 
hear folks argue on the other side of it, we are not throwing away the 
key on youthful offenders, but there are ways to reach out to those 
that have not had discipline in their lives, like boot camps or 
institutional type settings that provide them training and skills that 
they have not had.

[[Page H1784]]

  You mentioned some of these volunteer organizations. I think the list 
goes on and on, things like even scouting, Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts 
or 4-H, Big Brothers and Big Sisters, which provide adult mentors for 
adolescents.
  I think this is a problem that really hopefully the American people 
realize is not a governmental problem with governmental solutions but 
really does require all of us to take a little bit of a load and some 
of the responsibility. I thank the gentleman.
  I see my good friend from Kansas, my neighboring State, is also now 
in the well. I yield to the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. Snowbarger].
  Mr. SNOWBARGER. Mr. Speaker, if I could, I would like to kind of 
broaden the discussion a little bit tonight. We have talked a lot about 
juvenile crime. That is an important part of the discussion of crime 
altogether. But I think it may have escaped our attention. Last week 
was victims rights week.

                              {time}  2145

  Last week was Victims' Rights Week, but our memories of the victims 
of crime should not be restricted to a single week of the year, nor 
should our determination to deal appropriately with violent criminals 
be limited to lofty speeches and tough resolutions.
  The American people know, and they make it clear in survey after 
survey, that violent crime is a national crisis. And at a time in 
history when the world was never safer for a democracy, the streets of 
our country have become even more dangerous. We have largely won what 
President Kennedy called the long twilight struggle against Communist 
totalitarianism, but the war against crime goes on in our cities. It is 
a war we must fight with the same resolve, determination, patience and 
vigor with which we waged the cold war of the last past half century.
  I feel we should take the same approach to crime, particularly 
juvenile crime, that we have taken to welfare. Congress should permit 
the States to experiment with different methods for controlling crime 
rather than impose a one size fits all solution from Washington. It 
would be foolish to believe that Congress knows better how to fight 
crime in Kansas City, Kansas than the city council or the Kansas 
legislature does. It would be equally foolish to suggest that the same 
crime fighting strategies are equally effective in Los Angeles, 
California, and Lawrence, Kansas.
  However, there are some things that can and should be done by 
Washington to assist the States in fighting crime. For example, the 
Clinton administration should be moving more swiftly to create a 
computerized instant check system to prevent criminals are from 
purchasing guns. The White House promised that such a system would be 
in place long ago, and it is time they turned their overheated election 
year rhetoric on this issue into concrete results.
  The administration likes to cite statistics showing that the rate of 
violent crime is falling, but these figures fail to convey the 
increasing sense of the coarsening of our culture in which once 
unspeakable crimes lead the news on a nightly basis. Nor do they convey 
the preciousness of a loved one so senselessly taken away and the rage 
that come from the knowledge that it was preventable.
  Many Members of this body have, over the last several years, become 
familiar with the name Stephanie Schmidt. Her parents, Gene and Peggy, 
are constituents of mine and have lobbied tirelessly for tougher 
sentences for sex offenders.
  Unfortunately, none of us in this body will ever have the pleasure of 
knowing Stephanie. Three and a half years ago a convicted rapist, who 
had just served half his sentence before being paroled, kidnapped, 
raped and murdered the 20 year old college student.
  Gene and Peggy, two exceptionally courageous people, turned their 
grief into action by asking all of us to speak out for Stephanie, as my 
lapel pin indicates. Along with the parents of other murdered children, 
they have asked us to look more realistically at the problem of repeat 
offenders.
  The Schmidts have proposed a series of measures that I fully endorse 
and will be working to enact into law. They are designed to extend 
reach of what has become known as ``Megan's Law''. These proposals, 
which could appropriately be called ``Stephanie's Law'', are as 
follows:
  First, we should expand the current law requiring all convicted sex 
offenders to register in the state in which they resides to apply to 
all violent felony offenders.
  Second, the FBI in conjunction with the Justice Department and the 
Attorney General's office should complete a registry of violent felony 
offenders from all 50 States. Under current law the FBI is exploring 
establishing such a list. Congress should require it. We should examine 
the feasibility of disseminating information in a central registry 
through avenues such as public libraries or perhaps a 900 phone number, 
the proceeds from which could finance the registry.
  Third, any Federal legislative changes should include a public policy 
statements urging States to reform their laws dealing with licensing 
boards and agencies. State boards and agencies should not feel 
compelled to license or certify any violent felon who is on post 
release supervision.
  Laws by themselves cannot prevent crimes nor can anyone law protect 
all people from the particular crime it addresses, but that is no 
excuse for failing to enact the law when its need is so clear.
  I will be asking this Congress to speak out for Stephanie, for other 
victims of violent crime, and for the millions of Americans who live 
daily in terror of what awaits them outside their front door.
  I appreciate the gentleman's yielding the time.
  Mr. HULSHOF. I appreciate that. I notice the gentleman is wearing a 
particular pin on his lapel. Would he mind sharing with us what that 
signifies?
  Mr. SNOWBARGER. Again this was a pin distributed back in my district 
by the ``Speak Out For Stephanie Foundation'' in honor of Crime 
Victims' Week last week, again we were so focused on taxes that last 
week, I am not sure if there is any connection here between being 
victims of crime and talking about taxes, but in any event, we did not 
give it the attention we needed to last week, and I felt compelled 
tonight to raise the issue of the victims of violent crime and indicate 
that Congress does have a role to play in that.
  Other areas of criminal law, I prefer to leave to the States.
  Mr. HULSHOF. If I could prevail upon the gentleman a little further, 
I appreciate his comments, and I know before joining this body that he 
was a leader in the Kansas legislature for a number of years.
  What did the State of Kansas do either on crime victim legislation or 
perhaps dealing with juvenile offenders.
  Mr. SNOWBARGER. I will talk specifically about juvenile offenders, 
because it is amazing to me that Washington is just now catching on to 
get tough on juvenile crime laws. We did that in Kansas last year.
  We often think Washington has the answers to all these questions. 
They do not. A lot of States out there were before Kansas in submitting 
and passing legislation that would again treat juvenile offenders as 
adults when they commit adult crimes, extending the sentences for 
juveniles, again treating them as adults if they choose to commit 
crimes like adults would commit.
  In the area of victims rights, we passed a constitutional amendment 
to the State constitution that guaranteed certain rights to victims. I 
know one of our colleagues from Texas is going to be talking about that 
same kind of proposal for the U.S. Constitution.
  Again, States are already acting on those things, and sometimes I 
think if we do not understand that States can act more quickly and 
sometimes in a much more responsive fashion, then we are going to fall 
into the same trap I think our colleagues in the past have, thinking 
Washington is the repository of all wisdom.
  Mr. HULSHOF. I appreciate the gentleman, especially for his very 
eloquent voice, and he is right, last week we were focused on our 
pocketbooks, unfortunately. And National Victims' Rights Week, while it 
was something we celebrated and recognized back in my home district in 
Missouri, in fact, while we were in session last week I was told that 
Fred Goldman, who of course has become a very vocal advocate for the 
rights of victims actually came to Missouri to champion and to

[[Page H1785]]

remind us that the system, the criminal justice system, while it is not 
perfect, is the best system known in modern civilization.

  At the same time that we focus on the rights of the accused, 
certainly we do not want that system to victimize family a second time 
after having experienced a very tragic type of crime.
  So I appreciate the gentleman joining us tonight. He mentioned the 
State of Texas, and I see my friend from Texas has joined us, and I 
would be happy to yield to him, Mr. Brady.
  Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Missouri for 
yielding to me.
  I want to follow on the comments of our colleague from Kansas about 
the week that we just passed and some of the issues that were raised.
  During National Crime Victims' Rights Week, House Joint Resolution 71 
was introduced. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this proposed 
constitutional amendment which would provide rights for victims of 
crime, victims of juvenile crime, of State and of Federal crimes.
  House Joint Resolution 71 is important to me because, as my friends 
know, my father was murdered when I was young, when I was 12 years old, 
leaving my mom to raise five of us by herself. Our family has been 
through the trial, through a conviction, through sentencing, and even 
though dad's killer received life in prison without parole, like a lot 
of families we found ourselves before the parole board fighting to keep 
him in prison. Unlike a lot of families, we succeeded, but only because 
this killer happened to be a little built elderly at the time he 
committed the crime.
  House Joint Resolution 71 is important to America because we are a 
country with two classes of citizens, of those who have been touched by 
violent crime and those who someday will be. In this House Joint 
Resolution, in this constitutional amendment, we seek to provide some 
basic rights that, with the exception of a few enlightened States, are 
not available today.
  We are seeking the right to be included in public proceedings; for 
victims to know in advance the court proceedings that affect their 
case; to have the simple right to sit in the courtroom to lend their 
family support to the victim and, in some cases, to the prosecution, 
which is the same right that we accord the family of the accused.
  The O.J. Simpson trial, which caught much of the world's attention, 
featured the families of the victims in the courtroom. That is the 
exception rather than the rule. Today, in most States, clever defense 
lawyers routinely list and identify the family of victims as potential 
witnesses only to ensure that they are kept out of the courtroom as a 
means to isolate the victim's family.
  It is a cruel courtroom tactic that features, for the jury's sake, 
the family of the accused while isolating the family of the victim. The 
tactic is routine, it is wrong, and it is a tactic that ought not be 
tolerated any longer in this country.
  As important as presence in these proceedings are, House Joint 
Resolution 71 guarantees that victims are heard in these public 
proceedings. It gives us the opportunity to tell the prosecution, the 
judge, the jury, the parole board members how our family feels about 
having a criminal released from custody, often only hours after they 
have committed the crime; how appropriate is a plea bargain; how just 
is a sentence; and how safe our families will feel when the killer of a 
child or the rapist of one's wife walks free again in their 
neighborhood as a result of some parole board's action.
  We all agree, clearly, that justice must be sure and must be swift. 
Unfortunately, our criminal justice system is rarely either. This 
measure, House Joint Resolution 71, allows victims of crime to seek 
relief from unreasonable delays in criminal proceedings, which is a key 
advantage and benefit to those who are in a situation that they never 
thought imaginable, and hoping that the system will work on their 
behalf and often finds themselves years and years beyond the offense 
before any measure of justice is ever served.
  We are also seeking the right for victims to seek restitution for 
crime victims. It permits these families to seek some financial help, 
to help replace the financial support that literally was stolen from 
them. For many families these dollars, if they are ever paid, go for 
basic needs, like health care for their children, clothing, the cost of 
higher education.
  We are providing in House Joint Resolution 71 the right to know when 
the person who took a child's life or a family member's life, when they 
escape from prison, the right to know when they are proposed for 
release from prison. This is such a commonsense basic right to have our 
safety considered when determining a release for the criminal.
  Finally, in House Joint Resolution 71, we want to make sure that 
victims are made aware of these rights early in the process so that 
they can take full advantage of these basic, basic rights.
  In closing, we pursue the rights in House Joint Resolution 71, the 
Crime Victims Constitutional Amendment, so that someday in the future, 
somewhere in America, when a family finds themselves in a situation 
they never thought could happen to them, that we are able to give them 
the one thing they most desperately need, which is justice.
  Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's joining us and 
especially for his eloquence in speaking on behalf of crime victims. I 
know certainly he raises a number of good points, particularly about 
parole.
  I know that this body has, on occasion, encouraged States to enact 
tougher sentencing laws, truth in sentencing, so that when that 
collective voice of a jury pronounces a sentence on one they have found 
guilty, that that sentence, a large percentage of that sentence, will 
actually be served.
  I learned this week, in fact, that a man that I helped convict of a 
crime of murder in Missouri 4 short years ago was up for his first 
parole hearing this week. I wish that this was an exception to the 
rule, but, unfortunately, this is all too common.
  What has been the gentleman's experience in Texas?
  Mr. BRADY. As a prosecutor, the gentleman knows firsthand how 
frustrating it is to have that revolving door. And even though the 
States have put tremendous resources into prosecution and law 
enforcement into their prison systems, expensive prison systems, that 
is still unfortunately a common occurrence today.
  It is devastating to the family, to the victims of these crimes, to 
have this criminal walk free on the streets after such a short time, in 
some cases where the trial, in the time it took to receive a sentence, 
is longer than the sentence that they actually serve.

                              {time}  2200

  It is indefensible within our system. The good news is I think 
Congress has absolutely the will to make these changes and I think we 
have the ability to do so. I appreciate the gentleman's leadership as 
President of the Republican freshman class in guiding us, in focusing 
us on issues of quality of life, not just through the economy and 
through our society but making sure we have a criminal justice system 
that from your experience works as well for the victims as it does for 
the accused.
  Mr. HULSHOF. I thank the gentleman for his words. He is exactly 
right. There is no easy solution to this very difficult problem. But I 
think we can make some strides and provide some meaningful changes. We 
have begun that, even in the last Congress, giving credit to the 104th 
Congress that did provide that victims receive some restitution from 
those that took something from them, whether it was monetarily or in 
other ways that sometimes money could not replace but at least 
providing that right of restitution. But building on that, even as we 
did earlier in this Congress with providing the right of allocution of 
victims to attend these hearings, these parole hearings and sentencing 
hearings and the right to be heard at trial, but there is much more to 
be done.
  I know as the gentleman mentioned, House Joint Resolution 71 that we 
will be debating in the weeks and months ahead, that we need to 
continue to focus on the rights of the innocent. We continue to focus, 
Mr. Speaker, all too often, and rightly so in some instances, the right 
of those that are accused and certainly those due process rights are 
there and they should be there but at the same time we believe and I 
think

[[Page H1786]]

we have heard tonight very forcefully spoken by other Republican 
freshmen Members that the rights of the victims should also be heard as 
well in courtrooms across this land.
  Mr. Speaker, I see that our time is drawing to a close. As a simple 
comment to sort of bring closure to this discussion, the Founding 
Fathers recognized that each of us has been given a God-given right, 
the right to life and to liberty and to the pursuit of happiness. 
Violent acts that are committed by unrepentant criminals directly 
violate these God-given inalienable rights. I think it is good of us to 
take a moment as we did in this last week to focus on the innocent 
victims of crime and I think we need to continue to speak out not just 
tonight in a special order but we need to speak out all across this 
country and not just those of us in this body or not just those back in 
State legislatures or State senate chambers, or not only in the 
Governor's mansions around this country but I think it is incumbent on 
each of us to do our part, whether it is part of a neighborhood watch 
program or whether it is marching for the victims of crime, for their 
rights, or in any of these volunteer organizations that we talked about 
tonight, whatever we can do to help promote and restore the fabric of 
our society and our community. It is a problem that there is no easy 
answer to but one that I think we need to continually focus on.
  Again I thank the Speaker for allowing us, the 32 Members on the GOP 
side of this body, to bring to light this problem and some solutions 
that have worked.

                          ____________________