[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 45 (Tuesday, April 11, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H2080-H2089]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON H.R. 1501, JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORM ACT
OF 1999
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The Clerk will report the
motion.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Conyers moves to instruct conferees on the part of the
House that the conferees on the part of the House on the
disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the bill, H.R. 1501,
be instructed to insist that the committee of conference meet
and report a committee substitute that includes both:
(1) Measures that aid in the effective enforcement of gun
safety laws with the scope of conference and
(2) Common-sense gun safety measures that prevent felons,
fugitives and stalkers from obtaining firearms and children
from getting access to guns within the scope of conference.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) will
each be recognized for 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers).
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
My colleagues, I am delighted to bring this motion to instruct
conferees on the part of the House to insist that the committee of
conference meet and report a committee substitute.
This motion to instruct suggests to our committee of conference
members that we include both measures that aid in enforcement of gun
safety and also include common sense gun safety measures that prevent
felons, fugitives and stalkers from obtaining firearms and children
from getting access to guns within the scope of the conference, and
that the conference meet immediately.
I am joined on this motion by the gentlewoman from Indiana (Ms.
Carson), the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Millender-McDonald), and the gentlewoman from New
York (Mrs. McCarthy). What we are trying to do is to make it clear that
this Congress and our instructions include that we meet immediately on
our conference and report both sensible gun violence and gun
enforcement provisions. We can and should do both.
The President of the United States has been trying to get our
conference moving and, hopefully, this motion to instruct will
accomplish that very important objective. Remember, the truth is that
enforcement of gun laws is up under the Clinton administration. Gun
prosecutions are up 22 percent in the Clinton years, the number of
people behind bars for violent crimes with guns is considerably up, and
violent gun crimes are down by 35 percent.
No President has ever had a more successful record in driving down
violent crime than President Clinton, but we should do more and we want
to do more. And so the only way that that
[[Page H2081]]
can happen is that my distinguished colleague, the chairman of the
committee, urge that we meet in conference and get the gun violence and
the gun enforcement and the juvenile justice matters resolved, and get
something on the floor and get a law on the books, or additional laws,
as soon as possible.
{time} 1700
This motion says that we can do better. So if we want to separate
ourselves from the extremities, from the inaction, if we want to
associate ourselves with the clear sentiment of the vast majority of
Americans, this is our opportunity to do so.
This motion tells the chairman of the conference to stop not meeting,
to stop hiding behind process, and to get to work with a conference
meeting that deals with both existing loopholes in gun laws and with
stronger enforcement by closing loopholes that exist.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. HYDE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I say to my good friend, the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers), that I am with him a hundred percent on this
resolution. We are going to support it. It asks for what we think ought
to happen. We ought to have a meeting. We ought to discuss these
things. We ought to settle them.
I would point out parenthetically that paragraph number 2, ``common
sense gun safety measure that prevent felons, fugitives and stalkers
from obtaining firearms and children from getting access to guns,'' is
already the law.
The Brady bill, the Brady Law, Title 18, section 922(g), already
prohibits fugitives, stalkers, and felons from buying or possessing a
gun. And children already cannot buy handguns. I am proposing in my
offer a ban on assault weapons being available to youngsters.
Now, I have been proposing a gun control bill for many, many months.
Last November 4, I sent a copy of it to the gentleman from Missouri
(Mr. Gephardt), and we have been talking about it on and off for, lo,
these many months.
The proposal that I have offered accepts the trigger lock
requirement, in fact, as a stand-alone bill, it passed 311-115; a
juvenile Brady that says, if a juvenile commits a disqualifying crime,
they will never be eligible for a gun. That passed 395-27. We passed a
ban on these large ammunition clips, 10 cartridges or more. That passed
by voice vote. And then we had a prohibition on juveniles from
possessing assault weapons, which I mentioned earlier. That passed 254-
69.
So we have already passed these things. We could have the makings of
a decent gun bill. There is one sticking point and that is the so-
called ``gun show loophole.''
Now, we are confronted with two versions of a solution to the gun
show loophole. We have the solution of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Dingell) out here, which is, in my humble opinion, unacceptable because
it limits the instant check time to one day.
Now, we can get 95 percent of the applicants in one day. But there is
5 percent that require three business days. They are not easily cleared
up. They are not easily answered. And those are the difficult ones.
Those are the ones that may have criminal records. Those may be the
people we do not want to get a gun. And, therefore, we need three
business days. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) does not allow
that, so I cannot accept that.
Now, over here we have the other Democrat gun show provision, and
that is by the great Senator from New Jersey, Senator Lautenberg. Well,
his bill literally defines gun shows out of existence. He has the three
business days. That is fine. But he also requires such burdensome
provisions on people who are conducting a gun show that it is just
unsupportable. It is too much the other way.
I propose meeting in the middle, a compromise, that requires every
gun sold at a gun show to have an instant check, the purchaser, that
requires three business days for the 5 percent that we have trouble
getting the instant check on, and creating a class of instant-check
registrars who are not licensed gun dealers but, nonetheless, are
certified to be able to provide the instant check so the volume can be
dealt with.
Now, that is a solution that meets the gun show loophole. It tightens
that existing law, gives us the trigger locks, gives us a ban on the
large ammunition clips, gives us a juvenile Brady, keeps assault
weapons from the children.
What are we waiting for? Nobody will talk to me.
The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) has written me a letter
saying he will not negotiate with me unless and until the Senator calls
a meeting of the conferees. Let us confront him with an accomplished
fact, a fait accompli. Let us say, here is our proposal.
Now, all I need is three Democrats to join and we will have a
proposal that they cannot ignore. What do they say? An offer they
cannot refuse. Join me and ask the President to help. Give me just
three signatures and we are off to the races.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HYDE. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman because I think we
have created a way to get there. The 1-day check with the 95 percent
that will clear in one day, plus the escape hatch for those who may
take longer, two more days.
And so, when the gentleman asks, what we are waiting for, I want him
to know I am not waiting for anything. I think that is an excellent way
to resolve the matter. I only wish this were the conference committee
itself. But I would urge that we both join in together in urging our
dear chairman of the committee, based upon this, that we send him a
letter telling him what we are agreeing to on the floor if he is not
looking at it at this moment.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I think that is a great
idea. I say to my friend, I will join him in the letter or he can join
me. But I suggest that he and I finish our job over here and confront
the distinguished Members of the other body, as we refer to them
deferentially, with an accomplished fact, our gun bill; and I think
they will take it, and then we will have put this honorably to rest.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I
thank the gentleman very much. I am also very grateful for his support
of the motion to instruct the conferees.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am now pleased to yield 3 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Indiana (Ms. Carson).
Ms. CARSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for yielding me the time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of his motion to instruct
conferees. I am joined by the honorable gentlewoman from Texas (Ms.
Jackson-Lee) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-
McDonald).
This motion to instruct, Mr. Speaker, promotes the enforcement of
existing gun safety laws and advocates for common sense gun safety
measures that protect children.
Just today, Mr. Speaker, in my clips that I receive from my
Indianapolis office, in Fort Wayne, Indiana, an 8-year-old boy is lucky
to be alive after his 12-year-old brother accidentally shot him while
playing with a gun.
In Franklin, Indiana, Mr. Speaker, a boy charged in the fatal
shooting of his cousin has been moved to a private residential
treatment center in Pennsylvania. The boy was charged with criminal
recklessness for tampering with his father's illegal gun when he fired
it, killing 7-year-old Curtis Smith.
Mr. Speaker, I have been intrigued by the colloquy that has occurred
between the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and believe that what I heard is that the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) is willing to support the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and others in their motion to instruct the
conferees. I am very excited about that. I think it is a time that is
long overdue, and I applaud the two gentlemen for their agreement on
moving forward with sensible gun legislation in the way that they have
described.
[[Page H2082]]
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the motion to instruct
offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers).
This motion to instruct promotes the enforcement of existing gun
safety laws and advocates for common-sense gun safety measures that
protect children.
I am outraged that once again we are standing here talking about gun
violence and yet Congress has failed to act and protect our children.
Over three weeks ago, the House went on record in support of the
juvenile justice conference committee holding a meeting within two
weeks. As of today, that deadline goes ignored.
We are now standing here again to ask the conferees to move forward
and take action.
What are we waiting for? How many more children have to die? This
Congressional do-nothing approach on gun violence shows Americans that
the NRA lobby is more important than our children.
We have all too often witnessed the devastating effect that gun
violence has on our children. Nearly 12 children die each day from
gunfire in America, approximately one every two hours. That is the
equivalent of a classroom of children every two days.
Next week is the anniversary of Columbine and we still have not
passed strong commonsense gun legislation. We have seen a six-year-old
shoot and kill his classmate and yet we have failed to provide
preventative measures to protect our children.
Recently, I spoke with children from an elementary school within my
district (the 10th district of Indiana) about gun violence. I asked the
children how many had guns in their homes. About half raised their
hands. I asked how many knew where these guns were in their homes. Most
of them knew where to find the guns.
The answers to these questions show the scary reality that children
face in this country.
I call on the Republican leadership to join together with Democrats
in order to promote passage of sensible gun legislation that closes the
gun show loophole, requires registration and licensing for all gun
owners, and provides child-safety devices on handguns.
We, as Members of Congress, have the great privilege of establishing
laws that promote the well-being of Americans, but with that privilege
comes great responsibility to do what is right and what is ethical--and
that is, supporting strong gun safety legislation and protecting our
children.
Please, stand up for our children and support the motion to instruct.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 5 minutes to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum).
Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the
time.
Mr. Speaker, I think that every one of us here today wants to support
this resolution because, on its face, I cannot imagine anybody who is
not for effective enforcement of gun safety laws or common sense gun
safety measures. That is certainly where I am, and that is where I have
been all along on these matters.
I thought the chairman of the committee expressed it very well a few
minutes ago that we come to a point now in the debate over what is
going on with the juvenile crime bill in discussing the gun issues
where common sense ought to prevail. And common sense is very straight
forward.
I know because I have been down that road and presented something
pretty close to what the chairman has proposed that I am in agreement
on now to try to compromise this matter, and we never got a vote on it
on the floor. Instead, we had the two opposite ends arguing their
motions and their amendments, and they had votes on those and not on
the underlying proposition.
The reality is that when they go to a gun show to get their gun and
want to buy it, there are certain dealers there and there are certain
people who are not and they go to buy and they get an instant check in
a matter of just a few minutes, if we have a provision which all of us
agree on where an unlicensed person goes to the gun dealer who is the
president of the gun show and asks that it be checked.
The problem with it is that about half the States have records that
show if they have been arrested for a felony, whether they were
convicted or it was dismissed or whether a plea bargain occurred, or
whatever; and in those cases the check that they are doing will not
show up the answer to that. So if their name goes in, bang, they find
that out in a matter of just a few minutes. But in that tiny fraction
of those whose names appear from the other 25 States that do not have
the disposition results, they just are going to show that they were
arrested for a felony, they might or might not be qualified and until
the courthouse opens on Monday morning we are not going to know.
And it is only reasonable that we conform the check time for those
few people who have their names appear to the current three business-
day wait to do the check. And I think that is the right solution. That
is the common sense solution.
The problem also, though, is that effective enforcement of gun safety
is not what this administration has been doing on other levels; and I
am really concerned about that. That is why we had Project Exile out
here today in part.
The fact of the matter is that we are talking about the fact that
many laws have not been enforced that are on the books. There are some
20,000 of them out there across the country. What I think is great
about the bill we passed earlier today called Project Exile is that it
provides a grant amount of money to the States and says to those
States, for all their criminal justice needs if they want it, they can
have this money, this $100 million over 5 years that is available, if
they will simply agree to do what Virginia has done; and that is to
provide that for those who are found to be in the possession of a
handgun, carrying it during the course of the commission of a violent
crime or drug trafficking offence or using it in that case, there is
going to be a tack-on minimum mandatory 5-year sentence without the
right to parole in addition to the underlying sentence.
They get an additional tack-on of 5 years minimum mandatory sentence
if they are found to have the gun in their possession during the
commission of those crimes. And if the State does not have that law, it
can still qualify to get the grant money if it would agree to provide
an understanding with the U.S. attorney in the area or the attorney
general for the whole State to prosecute with this agreement those who
are convicted felons in the State who are found in simple possession of
a gun, whether they are in the commission of a crime or not. Because
under the existing Federal law, there is a minimum mandatory sentence
for 5 years there, too.
Why is this important? This is important because it is truly an
effective gun measure. It provides deterrents that say, we are not
going to stand for anybody using a gun in the commission of a crime;
and if they commit a crime and the States adopt these rules, and most
of the crimes in the States are in the States, not in the Federal
system, then they are going to go away for a long period of time. And
we have avoidable tragedies that are going to finally be avoidable.
They are avoidable in the sense that if they have people out on the
streets who have been locked up before who have committed these violent
crimes and go back out again, they are there to commit crimes again.
And most of the violent crime with guns in this country, unfortunately,
are committed by those who have been in prison previously.
So those tragedies are avoidable if the States will come forward and
enact what Virginia has done in Project Exile and what we have
encouraged in this bill we have passed earlier today, and that is a
minimum mandatory 5-year sentence on top of what other crime they have
if they committed it with a gun. And in addition, of course, we have
the deterrent message that is involved in it. That is the kind of
enforcement we need.
We are here today, though, talking about in this motion to instruct
getting together on another bill. And I am all for doing it. I am for
the safety locks, and I am for trying to have a small capacity involved
in this with fewer clips; and I am for a lot of other things that are
in that bill.
The sticking point in the gun shows can be resolved. It should be
resolved. Common sense, which is the other part of this resolution,
says it should be. I am for common sense. Let us adopt this motion to
instruct and get it done.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 3 minutes to the
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy).
Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I have to say, since last
August, we have certainly been trying to
[[Page H2083]]
meet and come up with some agreement. But this is spring, and spring is
always the rebirth and the rethinking and the replanting and the
regrowing. So maybe because we finally are seeing the American people
and maybe because the Million Moms March is coming up on Mother's Day
we are getting a lot of pressure to get actually something done because
the American people want something done.
{time} 1715
Certainly this side of the aisle is more than willing to work and
hopefully we can get a bill done because I have always said, it does
not matter whether you are Republican or Democrat, we should be
protecting our children and our citizens. We certainly do support the
Senate-backed gun safety provisions. They included closing the gun show
loophole, banning high capacity ammunition clips, and requiring child
safety locks on all new guns. To me those are all common sense.
Today obviously we have seen the President, he has been right next
door in Maryland signing legislation that requires child safety locks
in that State. New York State, we have got Governor Pataki putting
forth his initiatives on gun violence in this country. We are seeing it
with all our governors. I am very happy to see that the NRA has decided
to work with us and say, well, maybe we should be doing something here
today. I am very happy to work with the NRA. We always have been.
Certainly I am sure they will be sitting with us when we come up to the
conferees.
The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and I, we agree on
something else. Today we passed and voted on the gentleman from
Florida's bill, but I happen to think that Enforce, which is a bill
that the gentleman from Michigan and I are there with, would add more
resources to trying to stop the gun violence in this country, and the
only way we are going to be able to do that, if we give our police, our
ATF, and our local prosecutors and Federal prosecutors the backup that
they need.
I hope while we are all in this good mood right before we go back on
vacation that we can get all this done. I would be absolutely thrilled.
Actually you might see me smile for the first time in a number of
years. But all kidding aside, I am happy that we have come to this
point. I am happy we have come to this point and I am happy that we are
actually talking, because since August we have lost too many children
on a daily basis, we have lost too many citizens on a daily basis, and
we do not even have a count on how many are injured and have survived.
So anything that we can do to move this forward, to show the American
people that we do care, because I have to tell you, the American people
are starting to have a lot of second thoughts about the sanity that was
inside this building. If we could all come together and work together
to have a meaningful bill passed, with this motion I certainly support
it and thank everybody for getting us to this point.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the gentlewoman from
New York (Mrs. McCarthy). She is certainly sincere. I just am concerned
that expectations are so high that passing this sort of legislation is
somehow going to fill the hearts and the souls of our young people that
now somehow are empty and consumed with violence with sweetness and
light. There is much more to the problem of the culture that encourages
antisocial conduct, much more profound than simply restricting the
availability of the weapons that cause all the problems.
I do not mean to demean the fact that we need legislation to narrow
the access to these weapons of destruction, but to think that that is
going to solve the problem I think misses the mark. There were some 17
Federal laws and some 14 State laws that were violated at Columbine.
Adding more laws, I still think it is worth the effort, I do not
denigrate that. It is worth the effort. We have to keep the focus on
these things. But let us not end our quest for a solution to the wanton
destruction of life, especially among our young people thinking if we
remove the instruments of death somehow we will remove the incentives
for treating life as a thing and as a throwaway item.
As I have said before, and I welcome this opportunity to say it
again, we have a bill, we want your support, we have had it for many
months, and the only contentious part is the gun show part, and the gun
show part that we propose is a middle ground between the Dingell
amendment and the Lautenberg amendment. Let us get on this and let us
confront the Senate with it, which is another galaxy as we all know,
but let us confront them with it and say, Here it is, we need your
support.
If we can do that, as I say, the problem, the immediate problem of
getting a decent, common sense response to the high school killings can
be solved. I believe we can do it. I hate to be cynical. I hate to
think that some people want the issue and not a bill, not a solution. I
do not believe that. I refuse to believe that. I will not believe that.
But right now we need cooperation and consultation. Let us put politics
aside and let us agree that we have a plan and it is going to work.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds to thank the
gentleman, the chairman of the committee for his remarks, and also to
thank him for joining in the letter that we are sending to the chairman
of the conference committee, Orrin Hatch.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Millender-McDonald) who has worked on gun safety for a couple of
Congresses now.
(Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD asked and was given permission to revise and
extend her remarks.)
Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, let me first thank the ranking
member of the Committee on the Judiciary the gentleman from Michigan
(Mr. Conyers) for offering this motion, bringing us back to this point
where we can engage in, hopefully, dialogue in conference. I would like
to thank the gentleman from Illinois for his position in wanting to be
open to get this to conference and to resolve this issue.
We have long struggled as mothers and grandmothers in seeing so many
children being killed at the touch of a gun, a gun that a trigger lock
can be placed on and perhaps prevent the killings of over 13 children
per day. Yes, I have introduced a bill in the 105th Congress and the
106th Congress talking about child safety locks. I looked at that as
just common sense legislation, nothing too onerous but simply trying to
make sure that our children are safe. There are mothers who are crying
to me in the area that I represent in Watts, one of the most violent
areas in this country, where violence has just absolutely permeated the
streets. They are asking for this type of safety measure that will help
us to bring our children back to some sensibility and hopefully will
bring families together.
I agree with the gentleman from Illinois that this is not the end-all
of all of it but it is the beginning of helping us cope with this
issue. I say to the chairman and the ranking member, I hope in their
final words today that they will give us some definitive dates or date
by which we can convene this conference so that we can speak to the
many questions that mothers are asking and fathers are asking about gun
safety and their children. I say to them that this Nation has entrusted
us with trying to do the best we can in the halls of Congress to bring
about sensible legislation that will protect our children. I think this
is a move in the right direction. I urge the chairman and the ranking
member to give us dates as they leave today to help us to come to the
point that we want to get to.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Ohio (Mrs. Jones).
Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, this motion directs members of the
conference committee on the Senate-passed bipartisan gun violence bill
to immediately meet and report both sensible gun violence and gun
enforcement provisions. We can and should do both.
Instead, the majority bowing to the NRA has tried to stifle both gun
violence legislation and gun enforcement legislation. They will not
have the conference committee meet even though they tell the President
they will try to do otherwise. Just weeks ago, the NRA attacked
President Clinton with the rhetoric that made members of the majority
party run away from them. They
[[Page H2084]]
even opposed the Lofgren motion that directed the conference to meet.
Even NRA sees that its extremeness has backfired. They are today
supporting this motion that goes beyond Lofgren to say that we should
meet and report legislation on loopholes and enforcement. Even the NRA
is running for cover. But we do not want cover. We want action. Today,
an enforcement bill was passed. I did not get a chance to speak on that
issue but that bill does nothing more than prosecutors and U.S.
attorneys can already do. Janet Reno implemented trigger lock, and
trigger lock is already a program that allows U.S. attorneys and local
prosecutors to proceed with serious enforcement of offenses committed
with guns. So it was, in my opinion, not a good idea to vote for that
because it only applied to six States.
The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) talked about it is more than
mere enforcement. Yes, it is. Prosecution is more than just mere
enforcement. Sometimes for children it means intervention, sometimes
for children it means diversion, sometimes for children it means
rehabilitation and not just warehousing which is what we traditionally
do in this country with children who commit crimes.
I am not for people using guns and violence and I am not for people
saying that they ought to be able to carry guns because in many of our
States they do have a carrying a concealed weapon provision. You can
walk around anywhere and carry a gun.
What I am for and what I am encouraging my colleagues to do is to in
fact say, we are tired of this. What we want to do today is pass
sensible, common sense gun enforcement and gun safety. Let us stop
talking about we want to get rid of guns and in State legislatures
enacting carrying concealed weapons provisions. Let us stop talking
about we want to reduce violence in our country and then we proceed to
pass nonsensical positions. Let us stop talking about we want to do
enforcement when we want to say, well, we are not going to pass a
loophole because we are going to keep it open for another day, that
people ought to be able to buy a gun even when you cannot clear a
record check. It does not make sense to me. Let us be sensible. The
people of America expect us to be sensible and use common sense.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Lofgren), a member of the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, as I have listened to the words here today,
I must say that I am more encouraged today than I have been since last
August by what has been said. I am hopeful that we will in fact be able
to achieve what I think is achievable. I think it is simply wonderful
that the gentleman from Illinois and the gentleman from Michigan are
going to send a letter over to the chairman of the committee and ask
that we meet. I commend both of them for doing that.
I was grateful to hear about the discussion that I know has been
discussed privately but never I do not believe on the floor before
today of how we can close the gun show loophole in a way that works
that the gentleman from Illinois described and the gentleman from
Michigan has described. I would just like to say that I hope that the
very positive language is followed up with very positive action.
I know that action is hard to do because there are forces in the
country that are opposed to taking action, and it will take us all
working together to make sure that this gets done. I agree with the
gentleman from Illinois that there are many problems that face America.
The overavailability of guns is one of them. But we know that there are
people who are emotionally unstable, people suffering from untreated
mental illness that go on rampages, children that have been abused or
neglected and who do wrong things. All of those problems will continue
to exist. But if we can reduce the availability of weapons that can
hurt so many, then we will have achieved something and we will still
have the other issues to work on.
I would just say that I am happy to hear the words. I am eager to see
the action. I am hopeful that the gentleman from Michigan and the
gentleman from Illinois can sit down as soon as possible even after the
vote on this motion today. The letter I think has now been reprinted
and will be sent off. I am willing to do anything I can to be
supportive of achieving this for the children and parents of America.
We will be watching very carefully to make sure that we all do our part
to make sure that this action actually becomes a reality.
{time} 1730
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to my
friend, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ford).
Mr. FORD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time,
and thank our colleagues for bringing this motion to instruct
conferees.
Mr. Speaker, as I think about the fate of some of our felons in
America, they cannot vote; it is difficult to get a job. I often have
those who have paid their dues and served time calling the
congressional office back in Tennessee asking for assistance in trying
to get a job to support their family. They have a hard time getting a
job.
Yet they can go right across the bridge from where I live, I am from
Memphis, Tennessee, Mr. Speaker; and they can go right across the
bridge into Arkansas and even parts of my State to a gun show; and, if
they are lucky, if it does not come up quite quick enough that they are
a convicted felon, they can buy a gun. Now, we do not allow them to get
a job to support their family, but if they get mad enough, we allow
them to buy a gun to shoot their family. Cannot vote; cannot get a job.
This conference committee has not met since last August. We do a lot
of talking in this Chamber about caring for American families and
American workers. What worker in America cannot go to work for 7 or 8
months and claim that they are on the job?
We claim that we are busy around here. We all know better. We know
that we are not accomplishing much legislatively here in this Congress.
We have a minimum wage bill languishing in the Senate; we have a
Patients' Bill of Rights languishing in conference. Finally those on
that conference committee have gotten together. We have seniors
clamoring for a seniors drug benefit. What is it we are doing that we
are so busy we cannot work on this matter?
The States of Massachusetts, Maryland, and New York, all led by
Republican governors, have all stared down Charlton Heston. Shame on
Charlton Heston for referring to the President as a liar. Shame on
Wayne LaPierre for suggesting that the President had blood on his hands
for the shooting death of the former basketball coach of Northwestern
University.
I understand tempers can flair and emotions can rise, and perhaps
mine is right now, Mr. Speaker. But I am a member of that generation. I
come from that generation that would have to deal with the legacy of
laws passed here in this Congress. I applaud the gentleman from
Illinois (Chairman Hyde) for his reaching out in the earlier part of
this debate, and I join my colleagues in hoping that a resolution can
be achieved between both sides. But that should not stop this
conference committee from doing its work.
I close with this. Some on the other side suggested we ought to be
focused on gun enforcement as opposed to gun safety. We can do both,
and we know that. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and Senator
Schumer have offered something that will allow us to do that very
thing.
I thank the chairman. I look forward to working with him. I ask the
conference committee on juvenile justice to do the right thing, to come
together and meet. I do not know of any worker in America who could not
go to work for 8 months and ask for a paycheck.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Lowey).
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this motion; and
I am very glad, Mr. Chairman, that according to my colleague, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren), a Member who has been
working on this issue, and our ranking member of the committee, I am
very glad that they seem optimistic that there has been some discussion
on the floor today that there will be meetings, that there will be
movement, that we can get a bill passed, because I do not know how the
rest of my colleagues feel, but I am so frustrated.
[[Page H2085]]
I listen to my friends, my neighbors, my constituents. They are
angry. They are all preparing for that Million Mom March on Mother's
Day, and they are angry. They do not get it; they do not understand it.
They feel that no matter how much we argue, no matter how hard we work,
our efforts to pass common sense gun safety legislation and to
strengthen the enforcement of gun safety laws seem to be blocked by
this Congress.
The cries of the American people, the cries that so many of my
colleagues and I have tried to echo and amplify in this Chamber, have
fallen on deaf ears. While our constituents demand real concrete
action, the Republican leadership puts up impassable roadblocks to
progress on any front. Any bill with teeth, any bill that will really
enforce gun safety laws and will really prevent children and felons
from getting guns, is immediately disqualified from consideration.
I do believe the American people get it. They are on to the tactics
of the NRA and its friends in this Congress. So it is time for Congress
to pay attention to the American people, not just lip service. The
Juvenile Justice Conference Committee should meet now, and it should
not stop meeting until we have a real bill to consider, with effective
common sense gun safety and enforcement provisions.
Preventing the committee from meeting and blocking the debate from
happening is undemocratic. We have no room for these tactics. I urge my
colleagues to support this motion.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record a letter recently
signed by myself and the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) to
Chairman Hatch asking that we have a Juvenile Justice Conference
meeting.
House of Representatives,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC, April 11, 2000.
Hon. Orrin G. Hatch,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Hatch: We write to request a juvenile justice
conference meeting as soon as possible.
As you are aware, in the last two months, we have witnessed
a succession of gun violence tragedies. We have been shocked
by a six-year-old shooting a six-year-old in Mount Morris
Township, Michigan. We have seen a nursing home held hostage
and a mass shooting in Pittsburgh. In February, Memphis
firefighters responding to a call were shot and killed by a
disturbed man. It is clear that the Nation would like
Congress to respond.
We know that there is not complete agreement on all of the
issues before the Conference. We also recognize the need for
compromise. We have already agreed in principle to proposed
language to reduce the waiting period to 24 hours in most
cases, but are still trying to resolve appropriate ``safety
hatch'' exceptions.
We have pledged to each other to begin anew negotiations.
We believe, however, that beginning the work of the
Conference will play a constructive role in the necessary
process of narrowing our differences.
We appreciate your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Henry J. Hyde,
Chairman, House Judiciary Committee.
John Conyers, Jr.,
Ranking Member, House Judiciary Committee.
Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 4\1/2\ minutes to the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), a member of the Committee on
the Judiciary, for 4 minutes.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), I
think I was on the floor earlier today and acknowledged that the
legislation that we were debating, the civil asset forfeiture law, was
truly a bipartisan legislative initiative. It had wound its way to the
floor, and we were glad to support it as both Democrats and
Republicans.
I can truly say today that where we are today represents at least
bipartisan commitment on behalf of the House of Representatives. So I
thank the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) for being part of
this debate, but as well acknowledging that the motion to instruct as
offered by the ranking member pursuant to his leadership, along with
myself and the gentlewoman from Indiana (Ms. Carson), the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Millender-McDonald), and the gentlewoman from New
York (Ms. McCarthy), is in fact the right way to go.
Just a few hours ago I took issue with the Project Exile, not because
the State of Texas might not have the opportunity to be a participant,
but I used the term ``holistic.'' That is why I think this motion to
instruct is effective, because it talks about the holistic approach to
gun regulation. It acknowledges that we do have a Constitution, but in
fact it talks about preventing children from getting guns. That is the
angst of what all of us are crying out, that is the pain of Columbine,
that is the pain of Kentucky, that is the pain of Arkansas, when our
children get guns and do violence.
The picture of this precious life reflects when a child has gotten a
gun. It has nothing to do with Project Exile and locking up grown
people that have guns. It has a lot to do with keeping guns out of the
hands of children. The motion to instruct talks about keeping guns out
of the hands of children.
I would hope that we could encourage the other body to sit down and
meet. I would hope that we, Members of the House of Representatives,
now knowing that the NRA and Handgun, Inc., is supporting this motion
to instruct that deals specifically with access to guns and keeping
them away from children, can we not have a meeting of the minds to save
lives?
Just last week in my district, a young boy took four pistols, I did
not say one, I did not say two or three, but I said four, in his
knapsack, if you will, to his school. That shows that locking up
criminals, which is extremely important, that use guns, and I am a
strong supporter of that, it requires us to have gun prevention; it
requires us to hold adults responsible when they have guns, and allow
them to get in the hands of children.
So what I say today is can we not stand on the floor of the House
with the motion to instruct and have it embedded not only in our heart,
but in our action? Can we realize that this life would not have been
saved on the basis only of locking up that criminal who had a gun? It
would likewise have been saved with a trigger lock. It would likewise
have been saved with holding adults responsible for letting guns get in
the hands of children.
The American Association of Pediatrics has put it in the right way.
This is a health phenomenon. We are losing more children's lives
through guns. In 1997, there were 32,000 firearm-related deaths; 4,000
of those victims were children and adolescents 20 years of age and
younger.
So the American Association of Pediatrics has said that the most
important thing is that we decrease the number of guns in the hands of
our children and in the hands of this Nation.
Guns, yes. Guns are something that we happen to own in this country,
and I recognize that. I recognize the second amendment. But I think it
is important that we also recognize that we collectively can save
lives. I would hope that the mutual work of those of us who have
offered this motion to instruct, and I would hope that the ranking
member and chairman of this Committee on the Judiciary will find the
momentum to move us forward to holistically approach this, gun safety,
gun regulation, gun wisdom, and, of course, guns that are in the hands
of individuals that will not cause us to lose lives.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, finding myself with more time than I need, I
would be pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms.
Jackson-Lee).
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very
much for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I would like in particular to read the statement of the
American Association of Pediatrics, and that is that because firearms-
related injury to children is associated with deaths and severe
morbidity and is a significant public health problem, child health care
professionals can and should provide effective leadership in efforts to
stem this epidemic.
The statement concludes that while there has been a slight decrees in
numbers in the last few years, the number of victims of firearm-related
injuries constitutes a public health problem that must be addressed.
Therefore, they recognize the importance of a variety of
countermeasures, educational,
[[Page H2086]]
environmental, engineering, enactment, enforcement, economic
incentives, and evaluation.
The most important aspect of this is to keep guns out of the hands of
children and out of the homes where children are.
So I close my remarks, and I thank the chairman very much, because
this has hit all of us very close to home. Because of the fact it has
hit us very close to home, I do not think we can wait any longer to
pass legislation. So I would hope that though we think that we can only
do it by enforcing those hard laws, which are part of it, we can also
do it with prevention, closing the gun show loopholes, providing
trigger locks, holding parents responsible, so that we can ensure that
we do not lose these precious lives on the basis of the reckless use of
guns or children getting guns.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his bipartisan spirit. I hope
we get that kind of vote on this motion.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today along with my colleague from Michigan, Mr.
Conyers, Ms. Carson from Indiana, Ms. Millender-McDonald from
California and Ms. McCarthy from New York. As a cosponsor of this
motion I offer this motion to instruct conferees on the Juvenile
Justice legislation. This is the second motion to instruct the
conferees to meet to have substantive meetings to offer the President
and the people of the United States a viable gun bill.
I strongly support this motion to instruct because the American
people have waited long enough for us to act on this legislation. We
can no longer delay. We must move forward before another tragedy like
that of 3-year old Alisha Jackson who died just a couple of weeks ago
because she got a hold of a gun while playing in her home.
Little Alisha Jackson, a vivacious 3-year-old girl who liked to watch
Barney and the Teletubbies, was killed Thursday, March 23 as she was
playing with a gun in her home. Her father stated that Alisha had found
a pistol in the house and was handling it when it somehow discharged.
As the motion states, I agree that the committee on the conference
must not only meet to discuss the current Juvenile Justice Bill, the
committee report should include:
Measures that aid in the effective enforcement of gun safety laws
within the scope of the conference, and
Common-sense gun safety measures that prevent felons, fugitives and
stalkers from obtaining fire arms and children from getting access to
guns within the scope of conference.
Just yesterday, in my state of Texas a 13-year-old eighth-grader
carried four pistols--three loaded--into a junior high school classroom
in a gym bag here. Fortunately he was caught, but the question remains
how did this child get a hold of these guns.
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) strongly stresses that the
most effective measure to prevent firearm-related injuries to children
and adolescent is to remove guns from homes and communities.
Though this may stop the proliference of firearm tragedies, I do
believe that there are alternative means to decrease the prevalence of
child firearm injuries.
The Juvenile Justice Bill provides such an alternative and it is time
for the conferees to meet to address the concerns of the American
people.
In the past few weeks my office has received many calls and letters
from constituents whom mistakenly believe that we support legislation
that will take away their guns.
It is obvious that the propaganda machine of the national Rifle
Association is working to change our focus from the issue of children
and guns and gun ownership in general. Like many of my Colleagues, I do
not oppose responsible gun ownership.
However, like President Clinton, I am concerned about children and
their access to guns. I am concerned that guns are not regulated in the
same way that toys are regulated.
I am concerned that we do not have safety standards for locking
devices on guns. I am concerned that we do not prohibit children from
attending gun shows unsupervised. I am concerned that we have not
focused on the statistics on children and guns.
According to the AAP statement:
The United States has the highest rates of firearm-related deaths
among industrialized countries.
The overall rate of firearm-related deaths for children younger than
15 years of age is nearly 12 times greater than that found for 25 other
industrialized nations.
The Academy even predicts that by the year 2003, firearm-related
deaths may become the leading cause of injury-related death!
Already, among black males 10 through 34 years of age, injuries from
firearms are the leading cause of deaths.
Even more tragic is the fact that most firearm-related deaths of
children occur before their arrival at the hospital.
Thus, most of our children that injured by firearms do not even have
a chance. This is the reality in our country that must not be denied!
Another important fact pointed out by the American Academy of
Pediatrics is that:
In 1994, the mean medical cost per gunshot injury was approximately
$17,000 producing 2.3 billion in lifetime medical costs, 1.1 billion of
which was paid by U.S. taxpayers.
Thus, it not only makes common sense, but economic sense for the
Juvenile Justice bill to include child safety measures so that we can
prevent tragedies like Columbine and Littleton Colorado from occurring
again.
Thirteen die everyday from firearms. Why can we not rise above our
political differences to pass effective gun legislation that would
address this heartbreaking situation?
It would seem that in almost the year since the Littleton shootings,
we have done little to move forward on the Juvenile Justice Bill.
Despite the majority's reluctance to meet and discuss the current
Juvenile Justice Bill, I am confident that the American people will not
allow this matter to rest.
This motion to instruct urges the conferees to act immediately on the
Juvenile Justice Bill. We cannot wait for another tragedy to occur. I
urge my Colleagues to support this motion.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Holt).
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this motion to
instruct conferees on H.R. 1501, the juvenile justice bill. I
appreciate the constructive comments made by the distinguished
chairman, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde).
Mr. Speaker, how many Americans must die before Congress makes a
commitment to keeping guns out of the hands of children and criminals?
How many more news reports do we need to see of innocent children
gunned down, of families and communities devastated by gun violence? At
Columbine High last year, 13 children were killed, 23 injured, with a
weapon originating at a gun show. We thought this was the last straw,
but we thought Paducah was the last straw, we thought Conyers was the
last straw, we thought Jonesboro was the last straw, we thought
Springfield was the last straw.
Just weeks ago, little Kayla Rolland was gunned down in a Michigan
elementary school, murdered by a 6-year-old child who learned how to
kill with a handgun before he learned how to read.
{time} 1745
It is time to put a stop to these tragedies. Compare our record,
compare the epidemiology with any other country. We have a serious
public health epidemic. Yes, epidemiology is the right word. This is a
public health problem.
This motion to instruct conferees on H.R. 1501 to meet and report a
committee substitute is important. It would include common-sense gun
safety measures. The conferees must take action to close gun show
loopholes that allow criminals and children and the mentally ill to buy
firearms.
Mr. Speaker, it must include provisions to require child safety locks
and other safety measures that save children's lives. They must provide
maximum support for measures that help enforce our Nation's gun safety
laws and protect our children from gun violence.
Now is the time for action. Let us prevent tragedies. Let us pass
this motion.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, we are approaching the 1-year anniversary
of the tragic shooting at Columbine High School. That horrible day not
only claimed the lives of innocent students but also shed new light on
the gun violence that robs too many of our young people.
The Columbine shootings were a watershed event that reshaped the way
that Americans think about gun violence. Parents asked themselves
today, Is it safe to send my daughter to school? They pray, Don't let a
shooting like Colorado claim my son's life.
People understand that the causes of such tragedies are complex and
varied. They also want to keep kids and criminals from obtaining deadly
weapons. They overwhelmingly support common-sense measures that would
keep
[[Page H2087]]
guns out of the wrong hands without jeopardizing the rights of law-
abiding citizens, but the Republican leadership, taking their cues from
the gun lobby, has failed to enact common sense gun safety laws.
In that year since Columbine, the Republican leadership has tried to
cover their failure with sleight of hand by presenting a false choice
between enforcement and efforts to close gaping loopholes that allow
criminals to buy guns. The American people rightly reject this false
choice, and we were here to say that Congress should take a strong
stand in favor of both enforcement and of enactment of needed gun
safety measures.
Mr. Speaker, I call on my Republican colleagues to join Democrats and
support effective enforcement of gun laws, support the President's
measure to devote more resources and prosecutors to tackling gun
crimes. Congress must also send to the President gun safety provisions
passed by the Senate, shut down the loopholes at gun shows that puts
guns in the hands of criminals, require a child safety lock to be sold
with handguns, and ban the importation of high capacity ammunition
clips. These are simple steps voted on in a bipartisan way in the
United States Senate.
These are simple steps which close dangerous avenues to illegal gun
ownership.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The time of the gentlewoman
from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) has expired.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield my last 30 seconds to the
gentlewoman from Connecticut.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, if I may, I yield 30 more seconds to the
gentlewoman so she may have a full minute.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, how generous of the chairman.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, this is bipartisan day.
Ms. DeLAURO. It is. It is wonderful. I urge the gentleman from
Illinois to support the motion.
Mr. Speaker, too much delay, too many lives lost have been destroyed
since Columbine. Americans want and they deserve better.
Yesterday, in North Haven, Connecticut, I stood with the head of the
Connecticut Chiefs of Police; the Chief of Police, Kevin Connelly of
North Haven; with the representatives of Mossberg & Company, gun
manufacturers; Marlin Firearms, which manufactured guns in my
community; with a representative of the National Sports Shooting
Foundation.
Mr. Speaker, the reason why I was there was to talk about gun safety
locks on guns. It was a collaborative effort with the industry, with
the law enforcement community, and with the political structure that
can come together around these issues. If only the Members of this body
could come together and say that, yes, in fact, what we are going to do
is to make sure that we do have enforcement, but at the same time pass
those gun safety measures that would make a difference in the lives of
our community today.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) has
the right to close. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Michigan has
expired.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, might I have a minute for the gentleman
from Colorado (Mr. Udall)?
Mr. HYDE. I am happy to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Colorado
(Mr. Udall).
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) for yielding me the 1 minute.
Mr. Speaker, I support this motion. Its adoption will remind the
conferees that they have a job to do and call on them to get started.
Each of us have been elected to debate and act on proposals to address
the country's business. Of course, it is not always convenient, and
sometimes it does mean foregoing other things that we would like to do.
Mr. Speaker, for example, I would have liked to have accepted the
invitation tomorrow to accompany the President when he travels to
Colorado for a public appearance related to these very issues we are
asking the conferees to consider, gun safety and steps to make it
harder for criminals to obtain firearms.
But even though I would have liked to have gone to Colorado, I have
decided I am going to stay here in order to take part in the debates
and votes on the matters that will come before the House. For me that
is the priority, and I think that seeking to reach agreement on these
important public safety issues should be a priority for the conferees,
so I urge the House to agree to this motion.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield 4 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Callahan).
(Mr. CALLAHAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. CALLAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to
me.
Mr. Speaker, I rise almost to a point of inquiry of the sponsor of
the bill, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), or the supporter
of the bill, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde).
Certainly, what the Members have explained to the Congress this
afternoon I do not think anyone could object to. I am happy to see that
the two Members are drinking out of the same dipper, as we say in
Alabama. But there is a question that I have that is sort of confusing
to me. That is the underlying bill.
As I understand the motion the gentleman from Michigan has made, we
are instructing the conferees to do a couple of things that sound good,
measures that aid in the effective enforcement of gun safety laws
within the scope of the conference. Certainly we support that. I think
all of us in this House would do that.
Two is commonsense gun safety measures that prevent felons,
fugitives, and stalkers from obtaining firearms and children from
getting access to guns, within the scope of the conference. Who could
be opposed to that?
Our problem is, Mr. Speaker, that the Members also instruct the
conferees to immediately report out a compromise measure. If I vote in
favor of instructing the conferees to do these two things, and then
thirdly, instruct them to report a compromise bill out, what if I am
opposed to what they compromise on? Does my vote here in favor of this
indicate that regardless of what they send out of the conference
committee, am I obligating myself to vote for that, in the gentleman's
opinion?
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CALLAHAN. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. CONYERS. I thank the gentleman for yielding, Mr. Speaker.
There are three things we do. First of all, we ask them to meet, and
then accomplish these two things. I will leave to the gentleman's
conscience and to the Members' conscience whether we are going to vote
on the finished product, because nobody knows what it is going to be.
But these are our instructions, and I hope that they can come as close
to them as they can.
Two of the members of the conference are on the floor, maybe three,
so they will be trying to live up to this commitment in our motion to
instruct.
Mr. CALLAHAN. To those of us, Mr. Speaker, who are not famous on the
floor of this House for voting for any gun control measures, we could
have a strategy where the longer an offensive bill stayed in the
conference, the better off we are.
Yet, I am in a position of double jeopardy. I support what the
gentleman is saying with respect to effective enforcement of gun safety
laws within the scope of the conference, and commonsense gun safety
measures. I support that. But this does not compel the conferees, as I
understand it, to comply with the gentleman's request. It just simply
says, reach a compromise and report back to this House some gun safety
law.
I am afraid that if indeed the conferees are inclined, they might
bring something back to the floor that is so offensive to me that I
might have to vote against it, which is all right. That is my
prerogative. But at the same time, I am really giving up the position
that I am in now, where I know as long as it stays in conference, it is
not going to be offensive to me.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CALLAHAN. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's analysis. He will
at all
[[Page H2088]]
times retain his autonomy and vote, as he has in the years he has been
here, according to the dictates of his conscience and his judgment. But
this is simply an effort to get some motion forward.
We are confronted with this issue. It is not going to go away. I
think we can solve it on the merits intelligently and effectively. I
hope and pray that we can come up with a product that would satisfy the
gentleman, and I know the gentleman's predilection against gun control
measures. I hope the gentleman gives us an opportunity to proceed.
Mr. CALLAHAN. I will do that, sir.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Bilbray).
Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this motion. I
appreciate the manner in which it is presented. I appreciate the fact
that the ranking member of this committee and the chairman of this
committee can articulate the fact that reasonable people may disagree
sometimes on the means to be able to acquire the goal, but there is a
common goal here. That is firearms safety, protecting our children,
protecting our families.
Mr. Speaker, the motion before us is very simple. First of all, I
think it is the place where we can all meet. The first part of this
motion specifically says that we need to take measures to aid in the
effective enforcement of gun safety laws within the scope of the
conference.
It can also be pointed out, the fact that there is more we need to do
in enforcement of the law. The President in the State of the Union
pointed out and said that we are not doing enough of enforcing the laws
we have on the books. I think we can all agree to that. I think that
both Republicans and Democrats can join with the President in saying we
need to have more enforcement.
But the other point of this motion also points out that commonsense
safety measures are not a threat to the second amendment rights, they
are the best guarantee in the long run of preserving those rights. We
are not talking about extraordinary measures here.
There have been disagreements between Republicans and Democrats on
certain issues. One of those issues that we have been talking about is
the gun show loophole. The ranking member, actually the dean of the
Democratic Party, may disagree with some of us who are Republicans
saying that there is a gap there that needs to be addressed. The
ranking member agrees with this Member that there was never meant to be
a loophole to allow people to purchase guns at a gun show that they
could not purchase outside from a licensed dealer.
Now, I know that there are Members on both sides of the aisle that
may talk about the fact that to close the loophole would end gun shows
as we know it. I want to point out to the Members that California has a
10-day waiting period, and has the largest gun shows in the world.
It is not the way to destroy gun shows. It is an inconvenience, but
frankly, as a gun owner, a lot of us feel that that inconvenience is
well worth the process.
Mr. Speaker, I would just ask all of us to look at the motion and let
us talk about this. The extremists on either side do not want this
motion to pass, and they do not want this issue to be settled before
this Congress adjourns. There are people in extreme components on both
sides of this aisle that want to see this issue be used for political
advantage, rather than public safety.
I want to commend the chairman of this committee, the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Hyde), and the ranking member, the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers), for bridging that gap and leaving those
extremists out where they belong, in the wings. I want to thank the
Members for bringing this motion up to address this issue.
I would ask everyone to take the words of the chairman saying, as the
House of Representatives, let us sit down and build a common agenda to
present to the other body so that we can move this agenda and get it
done and do what we tell the American people we really want done, that
we actually want good gun law, that we actually want gun safety, not
just partisan political bickering.
{time} 1800
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the chance to be able to address this
issue. It is a very emotional issue. It is an issue that bears a lot of
weight and I just think that those of us that really want to be able to
go back to our district and say we stood up for gun safety, we stood up
for public safety, we stood up for people's rights to be protected and
to be safe in their home and the fact is now is the time for the
ranking member and the chairman to get together, for us to follow their
leadership and find time to agree on good, common sense safety measures
and let us walk away from the excuses of always finding a way to fight
about this issue. This is a place we can meet and I thank the chairman
for that chance.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). Without objection, the previous
question is ordered on the motion.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to instruct
offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers).
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 406,
nays 22, not voting 6, as follows:
[Roll No. 118]
YEAS--406
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Andrews
Archer
Armey
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldacci
Baldwin
Ballenger
Barcia
Barrett (NE)
Barrett (WI)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Bryant
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Collins
Combest
Condit
Conyers
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crane
Crowley
Cubin
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeFazio
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Ewing
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Fowler
Frank (MA)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gejdenson
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Goodling
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hefley
Herger
Hill (IN)
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Hooley
Horn
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kasich
Kelly
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kleczka
Klink
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
Kuykendall
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Lantos
Largent
Larson
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
[[Page H2089]]
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Ose
Owens
Oxley
Packard
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pease
Pelosi
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Phelps
Pickering
Pickett
Pitts
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Reyes
Reynolds
Rivers
Roemer
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Salmon
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaffer
Schakowsky
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simpson
Sisisky
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Spence
Spratt
Stabenow
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Sununu
Sweeney
Talent
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Traficant
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Waters
Watkins
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Weygand
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (FL)
NAYS--22
Barr
Chenoweth-Hage
Coburn
DeMint
Goode
Hayworth
Hill (MT)
Hostettler
Jenkins
Jones (NC)
Metcalf
Mollohan
Paul
Peterson (MN)
Pombo
Rahall
Riley
Sanford
Souder
Stump
Wamp
Young (AK)
NOT VOTING--6
Bliley
Cook
DeGette
McIntosh
Myrick
Rodriguez
{time} 1822
Messrs. SOUDER, WAMP, PETERSON of Minnesota, RAHALL, MOLLOHAN, and
YOUNG of Alaska changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. BRADY of Texas and Mr. HEFLEY changed their vote from ``nay'' to
``yea.''
So the motion to instruct was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________