[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 139 (Wednesday, October 7, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H9999-H10001]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




ENSURING FEDERAL FUNDS MADE AVAILABLE TO HIRE OR REHIRE LAW ENFORCEMENT 
  OFFICERS ARE USED IN MANNER THAT PRODUCES NET GAIN OF NUMBER OF LAW 
   ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS WHO PERFORM NONADMINISTRATIVE PUBLIC SAFETY 
                                SERVICES

  Mr. McCOLLUM. Madame Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
the bill (H.R. 804) to amend part Q of title I of the Omnibus Crime 
Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to ensure that Federal funds made 
available to hire or rehire law enforcement officers are used in a 
manner that produces a net gain of the number of law enforcement 
officers who perform nonadministrative public safety services.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                H.R. 804

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. NET GAIN OF OFFICERS.

       Section 1704 of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and 
     Safe Streets Act of 1968 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(d) Net Gain of Officers.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision under this part, funding provided under this part 
     for hiring or rehiring a career law enforcement officer shall 
     be used by an entity described in section 1701(a) to ensure 
     that such entity achieves a net gain in the number of law 
     enforcement officers who perform nonadministrative public 
     safety service.''.

     SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       The amendment made by section 1 shall apply to all 
     applications and grant renewal requests made on or after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. McCollum) and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum).


                             General Leave

  Mr. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within

[[Page H10000]]

which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 804, the bill under 
consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  H.R. 804 amends the 100,000 ``COPS on the Beat'' program established 
in the 1994 Crime Bill to ensure that Federal funds for the COPS 
program are used in a manner that produces a net gain of the number of 
law enforcement officers who perform nonadministrative public safety 
services.
  The President's ``COPS on the Beat'' program authorized $8.8 billion 
over 6 years in order to put 100,000 community-oriented police officers 
on the beat across the country. As of March 1998, the latest month in 
which a survey was completed, the COPS office claimed to have funded 
71,000 COPS. Approximately 40,800 are actually hired and deployed on 
the streets. About 2400 more are in training.
  The remaining 29,000 are officers counted under the COPS M.O.R.E. 
program, which funds technology and equipment and is believed to 
produce real-time savings in order to increase policing activities and 
police presence on the streets. These grants have been counted towards 
the 100,000 goal not because grants have been used to pay officers' 
salaries, but because the technology and the equipment purchased have 
supposedly freed up officers to be on the streets.
  I have been a critic of the 100,000 COPS program in the past, not 
because I am opposed to putting more community police officers on the 
streets, but because I have been skeptical that the President's program 
will be able to deliver on what it promises. The subcommittee held 
hearings on the COPS program in the 104th Congress where we learned 
that local communities bear the majority of the financial burden of the 
COPS program, and the COPS grants were not going where they were 
needed; in most high-crime areas. Since then, we have learned many 
communities cannot afford to keep police officers they have hired after 
the 3-year grant runs out.
  It was because of these inadequacies of the COPS program that I 
introduced the Local Government Law Enforcement Block Grants bill in 
1996. This program, which is now law, provides communities flexible 
grants to control crime and improve public safety, including the hiring 
of police officers, if desired. I am of the view that communities, not 
Washington, know best how to spend funds to fight crime in local 
neighborhoods. In fact, just last month I received a letter from the 
National League of Cities stating that they believe that the block 
grants program, ``has been one of the most influential factors that has 
led to the reduction of crime rates in our Nation's cities and towns.'' 
I believe this proposal has delivered what it promises to communities 
across the country.
  Today's legislation seeks to ensure that the COPS office delivers 
what it promises. Recent news accounts indicate that some police 
agencies have failed to ensure an actual net gain of officers with the 
COPS grants they have received. Rather than creating new positions, 
some grants are used to fill existing vacancies, even though the law 
prohibits replacing officers who retire or who have otherwise left 
through attrition.
  A September 1977 General Accounting Office report noted that the 
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services' efforts to monitor the 
COPS grants were ``limited'' and ``information regarding the 
accomplishments of the police agencies who received the grants were not 
consistently collected or reviewed.'' The COPS office has since made an 
effort to improve grant monitoring by setting up systematic site visits 
and telephone monitoring of grantees. H.R. 804 is designed to ensure 
that Federal funds for the COPS program are used to ensure net gains of 
officers and encourage the COPS office to improve grant monitoring of 
the program to ensure the goal that is involved in this issue.
  I, therefore, support this bill, and I certainly want to thank the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) for sponsoring it. I believe it 
improves the existing COPS program, and I urge my colleagues to support 
it.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume, and I rise in support of this legislation that was 
introduced by my very good friend, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Traficant), who has worked very hard on this legislation.
  I also want to thank the chairman, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
McCollum), for working hard to ensure that Federal funds for the ``COPS 
on the Beat'' program are used in a manner that produces a net gain in 
the number of law enforcement officers who perform nonadministrative 
safety services.
  If I might draw upon my local experience again as a city council 
member working with a lot of police officers, they are happiest when 
they are out on the beat enforcing the law, working with people, and it 
is infrequent that they are satisfied sitting at a desk. This 
legislation ensures that the police are where they need to be, 
protecting the people.
  Let me also compliment the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), who 
was heavily involved in ensuring that the ``COPS on the Beat'' program 
passed, as well as assuring Members that the overriding goal was to 
hire and retain as many neighborhood policemen, and police persons, 
might I add, as possible, and not to use the money for excessive 
administrative or overhead costs.
  Identical legislation has been enacted in each of the last several 
Congresses through the appropriations process but has become entangled 
in other issues. Many cities, towns, hamlets and places throughout this 
Nation have been gratified by officers that have come through the 
100,000 police, the ``COPS on the Beat'' program, and so this 
legislation now allows those individuals to get away from the headiness 
of desk work, if they do not have to do it, and get out with the 
people.
  This is good legislation that will help our communities fight crime 
and I urge a ``yes'' vote on this legislation.
  Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he might consume to the gentleman 
from Ohio (Mr. Traficant), the moving force behind this legislation in 
a steadfast and evenhanded manner. I wish to congratulate the gentleman 
on his work.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Texas for 
her support, and I want to thank the chairman, the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. McCollum). Without his help this would not now be law 
through the appropriations process.
  The chairman worked with me and he allowed legislation on 
appropriations bills for several years to ensure that, in fact, if we 
are going to be putting Federal dollars in grants to provide COPS on 
the Beat, then they shall be ``COPS on the Beat'' and not ``COPS Behind 
Desks'' or in public relation jobs.
  So that is technically what my bill does here today. It codifies 
through the authorization process so that we do not continue to, year 
after year, bring the issue up in the appropriations process to deal 
with the issue.
  As a former sheriff, I want to, in fact, comment on some of the 
remarks made by the gentleman from Florida, who has broad experience in 
law enforcement from perhaps a different perspective. One thing that 
happens in the law enforcement arena is that at times these grants do 
become available to chiefs and to sheriffs and they promote their 
friends from within and then put a few on the street. But the end 
result is the community that had 10 officers on the street before they 
got the money, and the taxpayers put up the money, the end result is 
there are still 10 policemen on the street.
  What our language does here, and what we have done in the 
appropriations process is this: If Houston, Texas, gets 10 new 
officers, there must be at least one of those officers, to say the 
least, on the street. So if they had 500 on the street, they must have 
501.

                              {time}  2320

  But it deals more with those little townships and communities who 
gets that one or two officers. If they had a total of four officers on 
the street and they get two of these cops through the grant, then they 
must have five on the street. It is a very straightforward message that 
does what the intent supposedly of the underlying program was

[[Page H10001]]

supposed to do, increase the number of nonadministrative street cops to 
protect our communities.
  I want to thank the gentlewoman from Texas for the outstanding job 
she has done in the short time she has been here on this committee, and 
I want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum). Without him 
this would not happen. I appreciate the fact he was able to allow it to 
get on the appropriation process and hopefully now we can avoid all of 
that.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Needless to say this is a right direction bill. This is frankly a 
bill that answers the concerns of our local communities. They want 
police where they need to be, out enforcing the law.
  I would like to thank the gentleman from Florida as well for working 
with my good friend from Ohio and his leadership for doing what most 
police would applaud and, that is, let them work with the people, 
enforce the laws and fight crimes.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time and say 
congratulations for this legislation.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume. I again want to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) 
for his work putting this bill together. He, as he said, has put this 
on appropriations bills for a number of years. We are finally going to 
get it passed.
  Madam Speaker, in closing, tonight is the last night and this is the 
last bill that Aerin Bryant who is a staff member on the Crime 
Subcommittee of Judiciary will be employed and bringing a bill out 
here. She is expecting her first child next month and she will be 
leaving our employ but not our hearts. We are with you, Aerin. We look 
forward to it. I want to thank her for many hours and many days and now 
several years of service to this Congress, to the Subcommittee on Crime 
and to the Committee on the Judiciary. I thank you particularly for 
being here tonight. You are deserving of that compliment. We certainly 
wish you fair seas ahead.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Wilson). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 804.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________