[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.

                          ____________________