[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 28 (Tuesday, March 14, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H960-H966]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  TIMELY TOPICS FOR A NIGHT-SIDE CHAT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Isakson). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 6, 1999, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, it is time for another night-side chat. I 
look forward to visiting with my colleagues in the next few minutes. 
There are a number of topics I would like to cover this evening, but 
first and foremost I have just listened to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Sherman) and his points on caviar from Iran. The 
gentleman's comments were excellent, and they were right on point.
  It is amazing how the administration, in my opinion, is dealing with 
the oil situation that we have got, the high gasoline prices that all 
of our constituents pay out there, yet this week they are going to lift 
the restraints and allow Iran, which is a member of OPEC, to go ahead 
and trade these products in our country. When we consider even further 
what the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman) has said in regards to 
the terrorist acts and the problems that we have had with the country 
of Iran, it makes it even more astonishing that the administration 
would lift those trade restraints and allow Iran to come in here and 
trade as if they are our neighbors in our neighborhood. It does not 
make sense.
  I had to put my two bits in on that because I think it is important 
and because I want to talk a little this evening about gasoline prices. 
It has hit all of us across this country.
  I also want to talk about my case of the week. As many of my 
colleagues know, I used to be a police officer; and I like to highlight 
some of the more absurd cases I read about in our national press. This 
week's case comes out of the State of Colorado, my home State.
  I want to talk a little about law enforcement and our drug 
enforcement in the State of Colorado. We have a lot of good hard-
working law enforcement officers in Colorado.
  And then, finally, colleagues, I wanted to talk about probably the 
most important topic of this evening: guns. Guns. A little controversy 
later on in the discussion, so I hope my colleagues will stay around 
because I want to talk about guns and what kind of situation we have 
got with guns. I want to talk about gun squads. I want to talk about 
guns, and I think at the conclusion of those remarks, my colleagues 
will walk out of this Chamber supporting what we are doing in the State 
of Colorado in regards to guns.
  Let us start at the top. Let us start talking about gasoline prices. 
We all know what is happening at the pump. And, by the way, I have 
heard a few news commentators say, gosh, we have nothing to complain 
about, look at the gas prices in Europe. Well, let me just say that we 
should not compare the gas prices in Europe with the gas price in the 
United States because the gas price in Europe is not comprised of extra 
cost of production; it is taxes. It is extra taxes in Europe.
  I do not think we in this country ought to sit idly buy and say we 
ought to raise our price of gasoline, just like the Europeans do, which 
means we are going to put a substantial tax increase on our gas prices. 
I think our country has every reason to object to the high prices of 
gasoline as we now see it. Our entire economy is dependent upon fuel 
and oil.
  Now, sure, we would like to lessen that dependence in the future. In 
fact, during the oil crisis in the 1970s we had a very aggressive drive 
to reduce our dependence on oil; but in fact we increased our 
dependence on oil, to the extent that we are much more dependent today 
on foreign oil than we were after the crisis in the 1970s, when we said 
we were going to be less dependent. A number of different factors 
played into that.
  Now, it is very easy to condemn oil. I deal with a number of people 
that are anti-oil. They think it is all big corporations, or they think 
this country has deserves what it gets in regards to oil. Well, if we 
really take a look at how fundamental it is, in fact there is not in 
this great room of ours, nothing, whether it is the furniture, whether 
it is the vehicles we use to get here, the electricity that lights the 
facility or powers this microphone or works TV cameras, all of this is 
very dependent upon this fuel. If we did not have this fuel, if the 
price gets out of hand, we will have an economic crisis. And when we 
have an economic crisis, that means

[[Page H961]]

we cannot do a lot of things that we think are good in our society, 
things like helping other countries, things like helping our own 
people, things like providing a strong military defense, things like 
providing health care, Medicare, Social Security. All of that is very 
dependent on a healthy economy.
  And when we look at our economy, the foundation of our economy, we 
have several pillars. One is good people. We have good people in this 
country. We have efficiency. We have economies of scale in this 
country. We have expertise. We have education. But amongst those 
pillars is oil, and we have to have decently priced oil. It is 
essential for us.

  Now, I want to point out that I have a disagreement with the Vice 
President's policy, as I take it, on oil. The Vice President's policy 
has been stated in a book that he wrote in 1992. Raise the taxes. My 
disagreement with the Vice President's policy and the administration's 
policy is that they should not be raising taxes on fuel. We are trying 
to get the gasoline price down, not take the gasoline price up. We 
cannot just continue to layer tax after tax after tax on the American 
people.
  I should point out again my disagreement with the Vice President. 
That was the tie-breaking vote in 1994, when the gasoline taxes were 
raised 4.3 cents per gallon. That may not sound like a lot, until we 
think about one of these poor working people that has to go to work 
every day who are pulling into a gas pump. They did not see a raise at 
work, and they are not seeing any more efficiencies. All they are 
seeing is they have to reach down deeper and deeper into their pocket 
and pull out more and more money at the gas pump. Then there are people 
in Washington, D.C. that think it is a good idea to have policies that 
say we ought to raise taxes more on gasoline. Those policies and the 
policies of that administration are wrong. We should not be doing that. 
We have to worry about this economy.
  Now, what can we do? We can all complain about gasoline prices and 
OPEC, and I can tell my colleagues that I have had experience with 
gasoline prices in Colorado. My district is the 3rd District of the 
State of Colorado. It is all the Rocky Mountains; almost all of the 
mountains in Colorado, and we have experienced high gasoline prices out 
there. Nothing like we are seeing today, but we have experienced those 
kind of prices.
  But today's price is being driven by a cartel. We do not allow 
cartels in this country. It is a monopoly. We do not allow that. We 
have antitrust legislation in this country, so we do not have cartels 
that stick it to the people.
  Now, some people say, well, it is the market. Let the market work. 
Well, let the market, if the market works in a true market form. I am a 
firm believer in Adam Smith. I am a strong believer in the philosophy 
of Adam Smith and capitalism and the market. But it is an unfair 
advantage in the market if we let a cartel go in. The cartel is not a 
concept of the market, and that is what is happening to your gasoline 
prices.
  People say why is the price going up? Well, part of it is the policy 
of the administration, in my opinion, that I have stated my 
disagreement with. But the strongest push upward, the more immediate 
push upward that we have seen in the last few weeks is as a direct 
result of this cartel called OPEC.
  Okay, well let us talk about the battle we are involved in. We have 
OPEC over here. It is a cartel. And as my colleague, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Sherman), said, Iran is a member of OPEC. We have a 
number of different countries, Algeria, Nigeria, Indonesia, Saudi 
Arabia, Kuwait. These countries all belong to this good old boy club. 
Now, surely some of us have heard, especially being in politics in an 
election year, we have to get rid of the good old boy club. There is 
not a better more definite example of the good old boy club than the 
cartel and OPEC. They are putting a noose around us and keep tightening 
the noose.
  Well, does this country deserve to have a noose put around us? Let us 
take a look at some of the OPEC members. Kuwait, for example. Maybe we 
should dial up Kuwait on the telephone: Hey, Kuwait, how long is your 
memory? Was it not America that gave you your country back about 9 
years ago? Was it not America that lost 50 or so soldiers giving you 
back your country? Was it not America that rebuilt your country? And 
this is how you express gratitude; you go into this cartel and say 
stick it to the Americans?
  By the way, Saudi Arabia and Nigeria, and all these other countries 
of OPEC, whose expertise do you think you are using for the mechanical 
aspects of taking that oil out of the ground, of transporting that oil, 
of marketing that oil?
  We have had a good friendship over the years with many of those OPEC 
countries. It would be a shame if that friendship is allowed to be 
diluted by greed, which is the only bottom line when dealing with a 
cartel. Greed is the only bottom line that a cartel results in. It is 
the only result one gets with a cartel. It brings greed. And there are 
a lot of victims sacrificed as a result of greed.
  What is my proposal? I think the President, and I have heard the 
comments of the administration, and I refer to the administration's 
policy, I am not referring to the President or Vice President 
personally, as my colleagues know, but the President and the Vice 
President's policies of saying we should not tamper with it, it is the 
market, let the market deal with this, is wrong. A cartel is not part 
of the market. And if the administration is going to consider it part 
of the market, then let us play by market rules, which means let us get 
in there and tussle a little. Let us get in that market and say, all 
right, if OPEC wants to charge us 20 some bucks or 25 bucks a barrel 
for oil, we are going to start taxing American products that go over to 
make it possible for them to produce that oil.

                              {time}  2000

  Now, starting tomorrow, if they want drill bits out of the United 
States to drill down, maybe we ought to charge them an extra premium to 
help us offset the fuel costs we are being dealt with.
  They want to transport? If they are using any kind of American 
expertise or American personnel, maybe we ought to have a special 
little assessment, we will not call it a tax, an assessment to make it 
a little softer approach, lets call it an assessment. We are going to 
put an assessment on OPEC.
  Two people can play this game. If OPEC wants to come in with a cartel 
to the free world and you want to put a stranglehold on us, it goes two 
ways. They are not totally independent of the United States. In fact, I 
say to OPEC and any number of those countries, not only was Kuwait 
dependent on the United States to free their country and give it back 
to them, all of those countries over there, without exception, all of 
them are dependent upon American expertise for their own economies.
  Maybe we ought to play a little tit for tat, as they say. That is 
what they do in the market; they get competition out there. Let us 
compete. Let us not just say, well, the competition has put together 
this cartel so we will just let things kind of wander as they might, as 
we hear from the Vice President's administration.
  Let us get out there and let us get in the ring with them. Let us 
take a look at foreign aid. Last year four countries, Algeria, Nigeria, 
Indonesia, and Venezuela, $165 million in aid, $165 million in aid to 
those four OPEC countries, foreign aid from the United States.
  When our budget comes up this year, maybe we ought to take a look at 
the OPEC countries that we have in our budget that we are giving money 
to to help with their problems under our foreign aid program; and maybe 
we ought to remember what they are doing to us, to the American 
citizens, to the hard working people that have to get to work every 
day, turn on their lights, feed a family, maybe we ought to remember 
what they are doing to us when we do our foreign aid bill this year. I 
think it is important.
  I think these gasoline prices will have a negative impact on our 
economy. It is nothing to laugh at. It is not something, as the 
administration says, well, we will just kind of let it go, you know, 
let the market take place.
  If we had a true market form the way that Adam Smith talked about a 
true market, we would not have a cartel out there, competition would be 
allowed to

[[Page H962]]

thrive, and we would not have this kind of situation occurring.
  The administration has got to recognize they do not have an Adam 
Smith type of playing field out there, they have got a cartel. And that 
is what is jacking up the price to the American people. The American 
people deserve an aggressive behavior out of its Nation's capital 
before our economy begins to crumble as a result of these oil prices.
  And we have got the leverage to do it. It is not like we are totally 
disarmed in this battle. We have got lots of leverage. That foreign aid 
is just one small part of it. American expertise is a big part of it. 
What we do for those countries is a big part of the leverage we have. 
We ought to put it all on the table. They laid out their cards. They 
got together and decided which cards were best to play poker with. And 
so, instead of playing poker with each one of them, they all got 
together and put their cards and are coming up with the best hand.
  Well, they do not have all the leverage. We have got some leverage. I 
urge my colleagues, let us get aggressive. Let us not sit back and take 
it. Let us get aggressive on this. We have got leverage, and let us use 
it.


                            Case of the Week

  I am going to change horses here for a minute. I want to talk about 
my crazy case of the week. First a little of my background.
  As I said before, I used to be a police officer. And you cannot ever 
get that out of your blood. By the way, I want to say to my colleagues, 
of course, I am from Colorado. I was a police officer in Colorado. I 
have got a number of good colleagues out there who still are on the 
force. And just a message to all law enforcement across the country, my 
constituents' colleagues, they have got our full support. We love good 
cops. We do not like bad cops, but we love good cops. And they deserve 
the kind of credibility that they have.
  In most communities, I guess I should take that back, in every 
community, overall there is strong respect and admiration for our 
police officers.
  Let me tell my colleagues about a case that I read about in the 
Denver Post. I will cite the article. Denver Post, March 11. That was 
last Saturday. This case involves a defendant who is accused of murder.
  This defendant went out and allegedly, and everything I say this 
evening is allegedly, although the evidence, in my opinion, proves it 
up, but the decision has not yet been made, so it is all allegedly, let 
us take that into consideration, this defendant allegedly goes out with 
one of his buddies and decides that they want to go ahead and rape a 
woman. And, of course, if you rape them, you better murder her, too.
  So they go out and hit a jogger with their car. They hit a jogger 
with the car. The jogger falls, gets cut up and things. And this 
defendant jumps out and says how apologetic he is that he hit her with 
his car and he offers to take her to the hospital. Good Samaritan, I am 
sorry I hit with you with my car. Let me take you to the hospital.
  The smartest thing that woman ever did was say, no, I will get my own 
help. I do not need your help. I am not going to let you take me to the 
hospital.
  So that victim did not work out. So then they go on down and they 
find another victim, a 23-year-old young woman. They take her. They 
rape her. They beat her. They abuse her. They torture her. Then they 
murder her.
  Well, let me tell my colleagues what the defense is saying. Now, I 
have got to tell my colleagues, in fair disclosure, I did used to be a 
cop. I am biased toward the prosecution side. I used to be an attorney. 
I practiced law. I could not practice defense law. I mean, I know that 
they are entitled to a defense, but, as an attorney, I chose not to do 
defense law because I just could not find myself defending somebody 
whom the facts made very clear were guilty.
  But that is an aside. An attorney has an obligation to defend its 
client. I just could not do that kind of work. But I do disclose to all 
of my colleagues, I have a bent towards the prosecution. But these are 
facts out of the newspaper. This is not the gentleman from Colorado 
(Mr. McInnis) coming up with an idea. These are facts out of the 
newspaper.
  So they go and rape this person. The defense puts on their case. And 
guess what the defense says? Oh, the defendant, this guy that did this, 
he thought he was the victim. He thought in his mind, and this is true, 
this is what the psychiatrist testifies to, that in his mind he thought 
he was being raped. In his mind, he thought she, the true victim, the 
murder victim, he thought she was causing infidelity in his marriage 
and he just did not really know what he was doing when he killed her 
because he thought he was the victim and he was trying to push her away 
from raping him and from causing an extramarital affair in his 
marriage. It is incredible.
  Dr. Riyana Rogers, a forensic psychiatrist who currently works as a 
professor at the University of California in San Francisco, let me tell 
my colleagues something, I hope I get the opportunity some day to meet 
her or that my colleagues get an opportunity to ask her about this 
defense.
  Come on, folks. Can you really think that a mental illness will allow 
a defendant, who earlier in the day, by the way, earlier in the day 
very methodically tried to get a woman in his car. He hit her with his 
car. By the way, I should also add this fact: A year earlier they had a 
witness testify that he dreamed or had a fantasy of going out and 
grabbing a woman and raping her. He said he wanted to rape a girl and 
kill her and make her boyfriend watch, according to videotaped 
testimony.
  And yet, this psychiatrist comes to the common people of America and 
says, look, I am sorry that the victim got raped. I am sorry that the 
woman got raped. I am sorry that the woman was abused. I am sorry that 
the woman was tortured. I am sorry that the woman was killed. But, you 
know, in this case the real victim was this guy. I know he is the one 
that killed her. Yeah, he killed her. But he is the victim. He thought 
he was getting raped. He thought she was disrobing him. He thought he 
was being tortured. He thought it was his marriage that would suffer as 
a result of this situation. So he called upon himself to justify it.
  Well, I am telling my colleagues, it makes me sick. Now, the jury is 
still out on this. I hope the jury does not buy it. If the jury buys 
it, I can tell my colleagues this will be one of the saddest chapters 
in American defense law in the history of this country. I said 
``defense,'' not prosecution, ``defense.'' Because it does a disfavor 
to your industry to their profession, and I used to be an attorney, it 
does a disfavor to their profession if somebody is going to get off the 
hook by claiming that, in fact, they were the victim of the rape, they 
were the victim and blame it on the sweet child of 23 who never saw 
another day.
  That is the case of the week.


                            Law Enforcement

  Next, I want to visit for a minute about law enforcement. I want to 
thank especially the Intensity Drug Trafficking Area.
  Senator Campbell and I worked very intensely, as maybe my colleagues 
know, on the appropriations bill. We put appropriations in starting 
about 3 years ago. We have got it in every year since. Senator 
Campbell, on the Senate side, has done a tremendous job for this, I on 
the House side. And it is the Intensity Drug Trafficking Area. We have 
Garfield, Eagle, Rio Blanco Counties are participating on a tri-county 
team, along with the communities in there.
  For example, my good friend Terry Wilson, the chief of police of the 
Glenwood Springs Police Department, I used to be on that department, I 
worked with the gentleman, he is doing a great job. And I want my 
colleagues to know here, this is a good program.
  What we have done is we have focused in on high drug trafficking 
corridors. We have given local money. We have not come in and said, we 
know better. The Federal Government has not sent in a bunch of agents 
and said, we know how to tell local law enforcement to do their job.
  What we have done is made available expertise and put money into 
those communities so that those communities can go out onto their 
highways, into their counties, into their cities on these corridors and 
intercede that drug trafficking. And it has been a great success. I 
want to acknowledge that success this evening.

[[Page H963]]

                 America Wants Solution to Gun Problem

  Now I want to talk about guns. We have seen a lot of tragedy in this 
country. We have seen a lot of debate. Unfortunately, a lot of it is 
being motivated by politics. But we have seen a lot of debates on guns 
in this country. And there has been opportunities for exaggerations on 
both sides of this debate on guns.
  There is a problem out there. Now, a lot of people will go with the 
satisfaction of just having the debate itself so they think they can 
score political points. But the core of America, the core of America, 
wants a solution to this problem. They want us to work out something 
that makes sense that will work.

                              {time}  2015

  I think there are a number of people across this country that have 
come up with an answer that does work. I think it is being completely 
ignored, most specifically by the national media. I must say that in 
Colorado, the local media has done strong justification to the program 
that I am going to talk about.
  Let me give a little brief history of the program that I want to 
visit about, but first of all let us talk a little more, very briefly, 
about this gun issue. My position has always been, as a Congressman and 
as a State representative for years before that, that it is the misuse 
of the weapon that we must focus on. Putting all your attention on 
possession of the weapon it is a distraction. It is not the possession 
of the weapon that creates the problem. It is the misuse of that weapon 
that creates the bigger problem, in my opinion.
  How do you deal with misuse?
  Now, this sounds simple. It is so simple, you are going to say, 
right, get on to the next point; but the fact is when you have misuse 
you have to go after it. You cannot have misuse of a weapon, misuse of 
a gun, and ignore it, because the misuse will only grow 
unproportionately. You have to go after the misuse. That is a simple 
rule, rule number one, go after the misuse.
  Number two, what do you do about the misuse? How do you go after it? 
Well, I am going to go through a project that I think is very effective 
in going after it, but there are other things. This project 
incorporates all of them. One, be quick, swift. If you see misuse, if 
you see misbehavior, move quickly to stop it. You must intercede 
quickly. Delay of time works against you. You must intercede quickly. 
You must intercede with significant force. I don't mean you call in the 
Army. I am just saying that you have to be able to reach out there and 
grab that misuse and stop it.
  So, one, you have to go after it; two, you have to do it quickly; 
and, three, you have to have significant ability to stop it, to enforce 
it. It is very much like touching a hot burner.
  That is an experience that all of us have had at some point in our 
early years. The elements of touching a hot burner are contained within 
this project that I am going to go through with you, but I think it is 
the answer. Instead of talking about, well, we should have this and we 
should have more laws on the books here and more laws on the books 
there, let me say politically it sounds great, but it is a distraction. 
It is going after possession.
  Let us go after misuse and let us compare it to a burner, a hot 
burner. A hot burner is very, very dangerous. A gun misused is very, 
very dangerous. A car driven at a high speed or misused is very, very 
dangerous. You must have consequences if you are going to stop that 
misuse.
  Well, take a look at a hot burner. First of all, there is a warning. 
Now, the first time you touch it, you probably did not know the 
difference when you were very, very small, between a red hot burner and 
a burner that was just black, it was not red in its color. So you walk 
up to a burner and it is red. Well, after the first time that signal 
alone will send little signals to your brain, trouble ahead, trouble 
ahead, there is a hot burner; do not touch that burner.
  The first time that signal did not go up because it was not 
implanted. The impression was not made on your mind what a red burner 
meant. We are going to place impressions on minds with this project. We 
are going to take care of that. We want people to see the red burner.
  The second thing you did when you did not recognize that the red 
burner was a signal that there is danger is you approached it; and as 
you approached it, you began to feel heat. The heat was of little 
consequence because you did not really know what it meant. You knew it 
meant heat as a small child. So you kept going to the burner and you 
touched it.

  What happened when you touched that burner? There were immediate 
impressions made on your mind. Ouch, ouch, it hurt. The response was 
immediate, the consequence was immediate, and the impression on your 
mind lasted you for the rest of your life: do not ever touch a red hot 
burner.
  Today I want to talk a little about Project Exile. That is the red 
hot burner. We want people out there to know, Mr. Speaker, that it is 
red hot; and if you touch it, it is going to burn and the consequences 
are going to be severe because we want to create an impression in your 
mind that the misuse or the illegal use of weapons or guns in this 
country will not be tolerated; zero tolerance.
  It does not require new laws, by the way, no new laws, no new gun 
laws, none of this stuff. Put all the political argument aside. By the 
way, this project is supported non-partisanly. I will talk later about 
my friend Ken Salazar in the State of Colorado, the attorney general; a 
little later about Tom Strickland and all of the attorneys general who 
work for him who have done a tremendous job, the same thing with the 
Colorado State attorney generals there, attorneys there who have done a 
good job. We have a lot of Republicans in there. Wayne LaPierre, head 
of the NRA, is involved in this, our governor, of course, in the State 
of Colorado, Bill Owens, a tremendous leader for the State of Colorado. 
He is involved in it. It is bipartisan.
  Let me begin by starting with a little brief history on where it 
started. It actually started in the East, in Virginia. Now, you are 
talking to Scott McInnis. It takes me a lot to credit something 
beginning in the East. I am strong on the West, but this one started in 
the East. It started in Richmond, Virginia.
  What happened in 1997 is Richmond suffered from the second highest 
per-capita murder rate in the country, second highest rate in the 
country. So they decided to put together a project they called Project 
Exile; and in 1998, as a result of this project, the city's homicides 
were cut by 33 percent, the lowest they had had since 1987, all as a 
result of Project Exile.
  Project Exile, what is it? What does it mean? It is a Federal, State, 
and local effort. It is not just a Federal effort. The Feds are not 
coming into your State, into your community, into your county telling 
you what to do. They are working a partnership. This is a partnership. 
The Feds, they are a partnership with the State; and they are a 
partnership with the local government.
  The effort in Colorado, as it was in Virginia, was led by the United 
States Attorney General's office. Those are the ones who prosecute, 
from a Federal level, gun crimes. Where do we come up with the name 
``exile''? What we wanted, and I say ``we,'' I wanted a part of it, I 
just think it is a wonderful program and that is why I am promoting it; 
but the reason the word ``exile'' came is if you violate a gun law, if 
you misuse that weapon, and violate that gun law, you are going to be 
exiled to prison, exiled to prison. Thus, the name Project Exile; 
Colorado Project Exile.
  In this particular case in the history, it started in Virginia, but 
this is what many of our billboards in Colorado are going to look like, 
just exactly like this, pack an illegal gun, i.e., misuse, misuse, 
abuse of the law, touch the burner, pack your bags for prison; and then 
report illegal guns, we give a 1-800 number. It have been so successful 
this Project Exile in Virginia that it has been implemented in Boston, 
it has been implemented in New Orleans, in Rochester, in Birmingham, in 
Baltimore and many other cities across the country, and now we in 
Colorado have adopted this and I urge my colleagues on the House floor, 
take a look at it for their own State.
  Look, there is a lot of rhetoric going on out there about these guns, 
and there have been some tragedies. There have always been tragedies 
with guns,

[[Page H964]]

misuse of guns; but put all the rhetoric aside. I have seen some 
rhetoric over the weekend, and most of it seems to focus on possession. 
We have the laws in place. We have a lot of gun laws in this country, 
and a lot of those laws are good laws. They make sense. For example, 
you cannot have an automatic machine gun. It makes sense.
  We have a lot of laws that make sense. You cannot misuse a gun, you 
cannot use a gun in a robbery, in this and that. It makes sense. Let us 
use them. Let us let people know that we mean business when we talk 
about gun laws.
  Well, Colorado Project Exile had a press conference last week. The 
NRA was there. I know some of you every time you mention the NRA your 
hair bristles. Other people stand up and clap. That was one side that 
was there.
  The U.S. Attorney's Office was there. The Colorado attorney general, 
who is a Democrat, Ken Salazar; and I applaud my colleague who does a 
darn good job in Colorado, he was there. Mark, my colleague here on the 
House floor, Mark was there; Tom Strickland, U.S. attorney, State of 
Colorado, he was there and his staff was there. By the way, a lot of 
Ken's staff was there. Of course, the governor led off on this thing. 
Bill Owens has done a tremendous job for us.
  The sheriff's department was there. Police departments were there. 
The Colorado state patrol was there. Lee White, an individual in 
Colorado who has put a lot of effort in helping us raise money, they 
have gone out and raised money to take this campaign to the people; go 
out to the people and tell them, the burner is hot. It is red hot. If 
you touch it, you will be exiled into pain. In this particular case you 
are going to be exiled into prison.
  Well, the project has multiple aspects to it; but the goal of the 
project is this, this is our goal in Project Exile: raise the stakes. 
You break a gun law in Colorado, we are raising the stakes. The 
citizens of Colorado are going to raise the stakes at the poker table. 
No longer are we just going to talk about issues like possession. We 
are going to raise the stakes, and we are going to look at the laws we 
have. We are going to make it very painful for you to violate gun laws 
in the State of Colorado. We want to make that burner hot. We want to 
make it red hot. We want it very clear that if you violate Federal or 
State gun laws you will go to prison.
  One of the ways that we are going to do it is we are getting a 
message out there. We really have three components to it. Remember at 
the beginning of my comments, Mr. Speaker, I talked about the gun 
squads. Gun squads, you said? What is he doing on the House floor 
talking about gun squads? Sounds like some kind of gun fanatic out 
there. No. We have a new gun squad, just like the vice squad. Vice 
squad goes after things, the drug squad goes after things, the traffic 
squad goes after things. Well, now the gun squad.
  Remember everything I am telling you about was supported by everybody 
from the NRA clear over to the State patrol, the city police, 
Democrats, Republicans. We are going to have a gun squad, and they are 
going to be looking for people violating those gun laws. If you are 
packing an illegal gun, if you are breaking a law like that, you are 
going to pay the consequences, so be ready. It is fair game; you are 
fair game. We have to let those constituents out there who think they 
are going to get away with violating those laws, who think we are going 
to ignore the fact that we have lots of laws on the books, we are going 
to let them know we mean business. That burner will be hot.
  So our gun squad will consist of a cooperative effort from our 
partnership with the Federal, the State and the local, to go out and 
coordinate our gun laws. For example, I will give you an example, every 
police officer in the State of Colorado will be given this placard. 
Now, this placard has the gun laws.
  You are saying, Scott, why do you give this placard on gun laws to 
the State Patrol, for example, or to the Grand Junction Police 
Department or people like that? Why do you give them this placard?
  This is not State gun law. This is a quick summary of Federal gun 
laws. Every police officer will have this; and they will be able to, 
when they make a stop or when they come into a situation, they will be 
able to very quickly figure out if there is a gun law, Federal gun law, 
violation that has taken place.
  Remember, they already know their city ordinances, city laws. They 
know the State laws, but really they do not have right at their hand, 
right in their palm, the Federal gun laws. Now they will have it, and 
they will be able to immediately know if we have a situation that the 
gun squad ought to look at. Our effort is to coordinate the gun laws at 
the local level, the gun laws at the State level, and the gun laws at 
the Federal level so that we can come up with the maximum temperature 
on that burner so that the person who continues to misbehave in our 
society and causes us a lot of grief, I mean talk about the challenge 
to the second amendment; I am a strong supporter of the second 
amendment. You talk about a challenge to the second amendment, it is 
these people out there that are breaking the laws that make other 
people in our society think that it is the second amendment that is the 
cause.

                              {time}  2030

  The cause is that our coordination has not taken place. We are not 
making that burner hot enough. We are not making it hot enough for 
those people that violate the laws.
  Well, secondly, of course, the second thing goes along on the 
enforcement. I have told you this, those officers will have this. We 
are doing lots of educational seminars in Colorado. We have citizens in 
Colorado, not just cops, not just lawmakers, and I have many, many good 
colleagues in the State house and State Senate in Colorado that support 
this. We are getting common people out there to go out and raise money 
to help us make the public, and, in this particular case, the law 
enforcement agencies, aware that, number one, we are behind you. You 
men and women out there have got a tough job on the street. You need to 
know that we are going to stand behind you, and we are going to stand 
behind you on this one. We are there. We are there with you.
  Two, we are going to make information accessible to you.
  Three, once you go through this effort, we are going to follow 
through with the prosecution side of it. We are going to go after this.
  The third element we need to talk about is public awareness. This is 
not just a fancy poster to bring on to the House floor. This is a 
duplicate copy of what our billboards and what our advertising program 
is going to be like in the State of Colorado.
  Now, I say ``ours.'' It is ours. It is the people of the State of 
Colorado. In fact, it is the people of the United States of America 
focusing in Colorado, or in Baltimore, or in West Virginia. It is your 
taxpayer dollars in the U.S. Attorney's Office.
  But in Colorado our project is going to read Colorado, Project Exile. 
Remember what exile means. You violate the law, you do the crime, you 
do the time, except this time we are going to do something. We are 
really doing it. Pack an illegal gun, pack your bags for prison, and a 
1-800 number. I will talk about that later.
  Mr. Speaker, when I was in the state legislature in the 1980s we 
decided we were going to get tough on guns. We decided we were going to 
get tough on crime. We decided we were going to get tough on judges who 
we did not think were doing an adequate enough job of being tough on 
these people.
  We toughened up in Colorado. We built prisons and we sent people to 
prisons and our crime rate dropped like a rock in water. Why? Because 
they knew there were consequences. They knew the punishment would be 
there and they knew it would be fairly immediate and it worked in 
Colorado.
  Now, look, I have heard the age-old argument, well, look, Scott 
McInnis in Colorado has the wrong idea. Build more schools and less 
prisons.
  Mr. Speaker, that is comparing apples to oranges. Who does not want 
to build more schools? Who does not support stronger education? But the 
finest education system in the world in a society that has it, and I 
happen to think the United States, when you look at the overall picture 
of education, I think we have one of the finest systems in the world, 
still has got people that are going to misbehave.
  The Catholic priesthood is one of the finest callings man could go 
to, in my

[[Page H965]]

opinion. I am a Catholic. But if you are Jewish, maybe a Rabbi, or 
whatever. It is one of the finest callings you can go to, but you have 
bad people. No matter how well you educate a Catholic priest, no matter 
how well you educate a Rabbi, or no matter how well you educate your 
general population, you are going to have some bad apples out there, 
and some of these apples are animals, just like the fellow I mentioned 
before, who declares he is the victim because he raped a woman, 
murdered her and tortured her. She was not the victim; he was the 
victim. That guy ought to be in prison. I do not care what kind of 
school you build in Colorado, you are not going to do much with this 
guy.

  Face the fact that a certain percentage of your population you are 
going to have to deal, you are going to have to consequences.
  So that is what we are doing. We are saying you are going to go to 
prison. We are not going to go out and rehabilitate you, we are not 
going to go out and doodle around and slap you on the hand and tell you 
we are going to look the other way, although in the past I can tell you 
very few gun laws in the State of Colorado in my opinion were enforced. 
We looked the other way. Too much hassle. ``It's okay. Old Joe here has 
got to use this weapon in a robbery or something, let's get him on a 
robbery.''
  Well, things have changed. Now, tragedy, of course, has created this 
change. Not just tragedy at Columbine, we all know about that, but 
tragedy in the other cases too, and it is time for the whole Nation, 
every one of my colleagues sitting on this floor, to change, not 
change, because I know you are supportive, I do not know anybody that 
is not, let us use the laws we have got. Let us go after them.
  Let us talk about the 1-800 number. ``Report illegal guns, 1-800-283-
guns.'' Where did that come from? Remember the program, maybe you have 
seen it in your neighborhood, I have got it in my neighborhood, 
neighborhood watch, the neighborhood watch program? Or crime watchers, 
where you call in. You do not have to give your name, and we put 
rewards out there?
  We went out in law enforcement, I used to be a cop, we went out there 
and recognized, you know, we do not know it all. We cannot do it all. 
We have got to form a partnership. We need to form a partnership with 
our citizens. We need to reach out to our citizens and ask them to help 
us. That is where crime watchers came, that is where neighborhood watch 
came about, and that is exactly what is going to happen with Colorado 
Project Exile. We are asking for your help.
  We are going to give you a 1-800 number. If you know somebody that is 
carrying an illegal weapon, you know somebody that used a weapon in a 
crime, you know somebody that has a fully automatic weapon that is 
illegal, call us, 1-800. No expense. No cost. You are helping yourself, 
you are helping your society. Call us. We mean business. You call us. 
Let us prove to you we are not going to tolerate this kind of behavior 
in society. We have got some good solid laws on the books.
  I want to remind everybody, the National Rifle Association supports 
this. This is not something that has got a polarization going on out 
there. There is a lot of polarization today. I just saw it over the 
weekend. The President's policies are this, somebody else's policies 
are this, the Vice President is demanding apologies.
  Forget all of that rhetoric. Let us talk about right here. This is 
it. This is a policy that works. It is nonpartisan. It reaches out and 
brings lots of partners into our partnership, and our partnership is a 
strong partnership, as witnessed by the number of people that were at 
that press conference last week in Colorado announcing the kickoff.
  Now, has it made a difference? You bet it has.
  Remember, the press conference was last week, the statewide effort. 
Tom Strickland, the U.S. Attorney in the State of Colorado, actually 
initiated this in October of last year.
  Let me tell you, first of all, has it been accepted by the public in 
Colorado? I have talked to you about how all the leaders have come 
together in a non-polarized partnership and formed a team. But have the 
people who we work for, have they accepted it?
  The answer in Colorado is yes. The media has accepted it. Denver 
Post, Denver Rocky Mountain News, Colorado Springs Gazette, Grand 
Junction Daily Sentinel, Boulder Daily Camera, I could go on and on. 
This has strong support in Colorado.
  In 1998, let me give you a few examples, these are some statistics. 
Primary charge, weapons used to facilitate drug trafficking. In 1998, 
eight people were charged. In 1999, 36 were charged. Project Exile was 
only in effect for 3 months.
  Another startling statistic. A felon in possession of a gun, in 1998, 
17 people, in Colorado, we have 3 million people, we got a lot of 
felons. Colorado is a great State, do not get me every wrong, but every 
State has felons out there, too many felons, and we know those felons, 
we know more than 17 felons had guns in their possession.
  Well, now we are going to know a lot more, because we are getting 
participation from the community and from the law enforcement agencies 
and from the prosecutors and from the Federal Government with its 
assistance. Now we know we are going to find out a lot more about these 
felons. That number jumped by 30 percent, by 30 percent, and we were 
only in effect for 3 months.
  We have a number of others. But let me just give you an idea. Here 
are some crimes in Colorado that recently charges have been filed under 
Operation Project Exile. In my opinion and in the expert opinion of the 
U.S. Attorney's Office and other people who really are in the field 
hands-on, these charges would not have been filed in Colorado, would 
not have been filed in Colorado, had it not been for our team effort on 
Colorado Project Exile.
  What are they? I will give you an example. Delivery of a firearm to a 
common carrier without notice. Illegal exportation of guns via 
commercial airliners to Honduras. They were exporting illegal weapons 
to Honduras. Had this project not been in effect starting in October of 
last year, our guess is charges would never have been filed under this 
law.
  Possession of two sawed-off shotguns. We know sawed-off shotguns are 
illegal. It has been a long time since there were charges filed. 
Project Exile, we are filing charges. We filed them.
  Possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, possessed an Uzi and 
a sawed-off shotgun and had domestic violence convictions and attempted 
third degree assault charges. All of those were wrapped up under 
Colorado Project Exile. Our belief is that most of those charges would 
not have been filed, had we not decided to take an aggressive, very 
aggressive, stance on the existing gun laws.
  Drug user, addict in possession of a firearm, marijuana and 
methamphetamines, while possessing explosive devices and possession of 
unregistered firearms, destructive devices. In the past we think that 
it was too complicated or the coordination was not right or the team 
was not in place. We think in this particular case those charges would 
have been overlooked. Not under Colorado Project Exile.
  Possession of a firearm by a prohibited person. Possessed a 9 
millimeter semiautomatic assault weapon and had a misdemeanor domestic 
violence conviction. Another case, look the other way. Not 
intentionally look the other way, but the sophistication, the teamwork 
was not there, the commitment to aggressively go after the laws that 
already exist was not there. It is all there now.
  I stress to you, one of our biggest partners are our constituents. 
This is not isolated to the police department or to the U.S. Attorney's 
Office or to Ken Salazar at the State Attorney General Office or our 
Governor. This is statewide.
  Possession of a firearm by an illegal alien. Federal firearm license, 
selling to a non-resident of Colorado, failure on the background check 
and selling to a convicted felon.
  So you can see, I have got page after page after page of violations 
we think will now be aggressively pursued against the people who decide 
that their misbehavior is something that society is going to have to 
tolerate. Their theory is, ``Hey, I do what I want to do. If I want to 
carry around a sawed-off shotgun or misuse a weapon, society is going 
to have to adapt to my behavior.'' Well, we have got news for you.

[[Page H966]]

 You are going to adapt to society's behavior.
  Let me say in conclusion, this Project Exile is not an attack on the 
Second Amendment. I am a strong believer in that. In fact, I think it 
helps us support the Second Amendment. This Project Exile is not 
ignorance of the problems we have out there of the tragedy. In fact, I 
think it is going to do a lot more to avert tragedies and to get our 
hands on these tragedies that are taking place than any of the rhetoric 
going on right now in the Nation by the highest levels of our 
administration.
  This is going to get things done. This is not talk. Talk is cheap. 
This is going to get things done. It has got support of the major law 
enforcement agencies in Colorado, from your local police department to 
the Attorney General, to the U.S. Attorney General's office. It has got 
the Governor. It has got Democrats and Republicans in the State house 
and the State senate supporting it.
  In fact, maybe the best way to summarize, I have not found anybody 
who objects to it. I have not found anybody who says to ignore the 
laws, the laws in existence on the books now. In fact, my friends who 
support the Second Amendment, one of their basic points is let us see 
what happens when we enforce the laws we currently have on the books. 
Let us see what happens when we make the consequences of touching a 
burner immediate and painful. Their bet, my bet, everyone involved in 
this, the bet is you will not touch that burner again, and society will 
be better for it.
  Mr. Speaker, I would urge all colleagues, in their respective 
districts, in their respective States, go out there, talk to their 
Attorney General. If you are Republicans, talk to the Democrats. If you 
are Democrat, talk to the Republican leaders in your State. Form a team 
like we did in Colorado and put in your own Project Exile. My bet, and 
I think it is a safe bet, and I am a betting man and I like safe bets, 
my bet is that after 1 year you will find out that your Project Exile 
has accomplished more than all of the rhetoric combined for all of the 
States.

                              {time}  2045

  But the rhetoric aside, put the action in place. You pack an illegal 
gun; you pack your bags for prison.

                          ____________________