[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 130 (Friday, September 25, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11003-S11004]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         JUVENILE JUSTICE BILL

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, first, I alert my colleagues that I will 
speak a very short time. I am going to talk about a UC that I would 
have proposed but will not propose today but will explain why.
  Earlier this month, the Republican majority came to the floor, 
unfortunately without prior warning, to propound a unanimous consent 
request for consideration of the Hatch-Sessions juvenile justice bill, 
S. 10. I see the distinguished Senator from Alabama here on the floor 
now. The UC was proposed late on Thursday afternoon. Unfortunately, it 
was after Senators had been informed there would be no more votes. In 
fact, I had already left for home in Vermont. We were unaware that they 
might want to proceed to S. 10 on Thursday.
  My concern is that there had been a year of inaction on the bill. I 
had tried to propose some additional changes to the bill, which was 
voted on by the Judiciary Committee in July 1997, but I was unable to 
get any response from the other side of the aisle in the Judiciary 
Committee on that. There was also no attempt to get a response from 
this side of the aisle on the proposed UC.
  I mention this because the failure of this Congress to take up and 
pass responsible juvenile crime legislation does not rest with the 
Democrats. And it is not going to be cured by any kind of a procedural 
floor gimmick.
  Over the past year, I have spoken on the floor of the Senate and at 
hearings on several occasions about my concerns with the legislation. 
At the same time, I have expressed my willingness to work with the 
chairman of the full committee in a bipartisan manner to improve the 
juvenile crime bill.
  I am not alone in my criticisms and in wanting to see changes in the 
bill. It has been criticized by virtually every major newspaper in the 
United States. It has been criticized by national leaders ranging from 
Chief Justice Rehnquist to Marian Wright Edelman, President of the 
Children's Defense Fund. The National District Attorneys Association, 
and other law enforcement agencies have also written me with their 
concerns about this bill.
  I have also heard from numerous State and local officials across the 
United States, including the National Governors' Association, the 
Council of State Governments, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the 
National Association of Counties, and the National Conference of State 
Legislatures. All of them have expressed concerns about the 
restrictions this bill would place on their ability to combat and 
prevent juvenile crime effectively.
  In short, S. 10, as reported by the Judiciary Committee, is a bill 
laden with problems--in fact, so many that at last count the bill had 
lost nearly a quarter of the Republicans who signed on as cosponsors 
since its introduction.
  The unanimous consent request that was proposed by the other side of 
the aisle, I believe, was patently unfair. It would have limited debate 
of juvenile justice and other crime matters. It would have permitted 
the Republicans to offer a substitute to their own bill but not allowed 
Democrats the same opportunity. The only additional amendments in order 
under their plan would be five on each side.
  We just received from the chairman of the Judiciary Committee the day 
before yesterday, September 23, the latest version of S. 10 which 
contains over 100 different changes, but the Republicans want to limit 
us to 5 amendments. That is not a bipartisan effort to improve this 
bill.
  While I appreciate that we are short of time in this Congress, and I 
understand why the Republican leadership would like to limit the number 
of amendments the Democrats may offer, of course, the decision to bring 
the bill up at the end of the Congress is that of the majority. I have 
no problem with that.
  But we have worked diligently to pare down the amendments that the 
Democrats plan to offer to S. 10 from 64 to the 25 substantive 
amendments which I would have put in a proposed UC. Keep in mind what I 
said, also, that just a couple days ago we were handed the latest 
version from the other side with over 100 changes. We are talking about 
cutting Democratic amendments from 64 to 25 substantive ones that 
address the substantial criticisms leveled at this bill. I want to 
assure that Senate consideration of this legislation is fair, full, and 
productive. I do not appreciate, frankly, what appears to be almost a 
procedural ambush to move this bill forward in a way that allows 
consideration of all changes from the other side but very few from this 
side.
  So, Mr. President, I am not going to make a unanimous consent 
request, but I ask to put this into the Record--not as a unanimous 
consent request. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record 
what I would recommend should be a unanimous consent request to be 
asked by the leadership entitled ``Juvenile Justice.''
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                            Juvenile Justice

       I ask unanimous consent that it be in order for the 
     majority leader, after consultation with the democratic 
     leader to proceed to Calendar No. 210, S. 10, The Violent and 
     Repeat Juvenile Offender Act and it be considered under the 
     following limitations:
       That the only amendments in order be a substitute amendment 
     offered by Senators Hatch and Sessions, a substitute 
     amendment offered by the minority leader or his designee and 
     the following listed amendments, and that if either 
     substitute is agreed to that the substitute continue to be 
     amendable in two degrees:
       Leahy--judicial review procedures in certain juveniles 
     cases; preservation of state presumption for prosecution of 
     most juveniles; access to juvenile records; separation 
     standard for juveniles in custody; crime victims assistance.
       Kennedy--gun control measure; Hate Crimes Prevention Act; 
     reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 
     Prevention Act.
       Biden--prevention program for after-school activities; 
     increase funding for prosecutor/courts grant program; modify 
     requirements to qualify for funding from $150 million grant 
     program; gun ban for dangerous teens; preserve the sovereign 
     rights of native Americans by continuing the tribal ``OPT-
     IN''; extension crime law trust fund.
       Kohl--reauthorize title V programs; restoration of the jail 
     removal mandate.
       Feingold--improve school safety; allow funds to be used to 
     identify early warning signs of potential juvenile offenders.
       Durbin--relevant.
       Bingaman--Truancy Prevention and Juvenile Crime Reduction 
     Act; to strike provisions relating to tobacco and alcohol.
       Lautenberg--jump mentoring bill, S. 1461.
       Wellstone--juvenile mental health protections.
       Murray--restorative/community justice.
       That there may be a managers package of amendments to be 
     cleared by both the majority and minority manager; and
       I finally ask consent that following the disposition of any 
     or all amendments the bill read a third time, the Judiciary 
     Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 
     1818 and the Senate proceed to its consideration; all after 
     the enacting clause be stricken and the text of S. 10, as 
     amended be inserted in lieu thereof, the bill be read a third 
     time and the Senate proceed to a vote on passage of the bill. 
     I further ask that following the vote the Senate insist on 
     its amendment, request a conference with the House and the 
     Chair be authorized to appoint conferees on the part of the 
     Senate.

  Mr. SESSIONS. There was a unanimous consent----
  Mr. LEAHY. No, no. I tell my friend from Alabama, this is what I 
would propose. I already stated that. And I have informed the floor 
staff on the Republican side that I would not make the unanimous 
consent request to this proposal at this time. Anyone who has known me 
for 24 years here knows I would never do this. I would not propose a 
unanimous consent request on a

[[Page S11004]]

day when everybody has taken off already to the various airports or 
home. But I am putting into the Record, so that Senators can read it on 
Monday, what would have been my proposal if we were able to make it. I 
would not seek to ambush the other side. I have not done that in 24 
years, and I am not about to start now.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Thank you.
  Mr. LEAHY. Thank you, Mr. President.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. SESSIONS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
  The Chair advises the Senator, because of the previous order, he will 
have to seek unanimous consent to speak at this point.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I ask unanimous consent, Mr. President, notwithstanding 
the previous order for adjournment, I be permitted to speak, and the 
Senate then adjourn under the previous order.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I really appreciate Senator Leahy and his leadership as 
ranking member on the Judiciary Committee. I would suggest, with regard 
to juvenile justice, that we have not had a year of inaction, as the 
Senator said. There were 100 changes proposed, and most of those in an 
apparently futile attempt to gain the support of Democratic Members who 
have been using procedural tactics to block the consideration of that 
bill.
  The bill came out of the Judiciary Committee on a 12-6 vote, and with 
bipartisan support. Since that time, we have sought to gain additional 
support from the Democratic side. I have been a prosecutor for almost 
20 years. I believe in this bill. It is not a political bill. It is a 
bill that provides resources and support and strength right to the 
local juvenile courts throughout America. It is in those courts where 
the real progress is being made in fighting juvenile crime.
  I see the Presiding Officer, the Senator from Ohio. A few months ago 
we had the opportunity to meet in Ohio with a juvenile judge, Judge 
Grossman, who allowed us to witness a model program in action. In this 
program the judges have the resources and the capacity to confront 
youngsters when they are first arrested for juvenile crimes, and the 
judges also have the option to do something effective to confront those 
children and to change them from the road of destruction on which they 
are too often headed. A community may have alternative schools. It may 
have boot camps. It may have intensive probation supervision. In Ohio, 
Judge Grossman has a truancy program with trials conducted in the 
schoolroom with the Judge present. These are the kind of programs that 
can actually deter juvenile crime in America.

  That is the heart and soul of this juvenile justice bill. I hope 
somehow, some way we can get a vote on it this time. It has been 
frustrating that we have not been able to do that yet. The National 
Juvenile Judges Association, the Fraternal Order of Police, the Boy's 
and Girl's Club, and organization after organization have supported 
this piece of legislation. I don't think there is any group more 
interested and more professionally concerned than the National Juvenile 
Judges Association. They have spent a good bit of time analyzing it, 
and they support it. This bill certainly represents a very important 
step forward.
  I thank this body and I thank the Presiding Officer for his 
leadership on juvenile crime and juvenile justice. It is a matter close 
to my heart. The Presiding Officer is a former prosecutor who has given 
intensive leadership to that issue.
  The legislation we have today is a product of bipartisan compromise 
and a lot of hard work. I think it is an excellent bill and it will be 
a tragedy, indeed, if for partisan reasons we are not able to bring it 
forward.
  The House has acted on good legislation. If we can get our 
legislation passed, even in these last few days--I know the time is 
short--if we can get ours passed and go to conference and work together 
one more time, we could pass a bill that the people of this country 
would be proud of and would, in fact, allow us to intervene in the 
lives of kids who are going wrong and get them on the right track. 
Sometimes that takes tough intervention. Sometimes they need to go to a 
boot camp or detention facility or alternative school. We need to help 
encourage States to do that. Mr. President, I thank the occupant of the 
Chair for his time and his leadership on this matter.

                          ____________________