[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 111 (Tuesday, September 19, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H7813-H7817]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       LOCAL GOVERNMENT LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANTS ACT OF 2000

  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 4999) to control crime by providing law enforcement block 
grants, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 4999

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Local Government Law 
     Enforcement Block Grants Act of 2000''.

     SEC. 2. BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) Payment and Use.--
       (1) Payment.--The Director of the Bureau of Justice 
     Assistance shall pay to each unit of local government which 
     qualifies for a payment under this Act an amount equal to the 
     sum of any amounts allocated to such unit under this Act for 
     each payment period. The Director shall pay such amount from 
     amounts appropriated to carry out this Act.
       (2) Use.--Amounts paid to a unit of local government under 
     this section shall be used by the unit for reducing crime and 
     improving public safety, including but not limited to, 1 or 
     more of the following purposes:
       (A)(i) Hiring, training, and employing on a continuing 
     basis new, additional law enforcement officers and necessary 
     support personnel.
       (ii) Paying overtime to presently employed law enforcement 
     officers and necessary support personnel for the purpose of 
     increasing the number of hours worked by such personnel.
       (iii) Procuring equipment, technology, and other material 
     directly related to basic law enforcement functions.
       (B) Enhancing security measures--
       (i) in and around schools; and
       (ii) in and around any other facility or location which is 
     considered by the unit of local government to have a special 
     risk for incidents of crime.
       (C) Establishing crime prevention programs that may, though 
     not exclusively, involve law enforcement officials and that 
     are intended to discourage, disrupt, or interfere with the 
     commission of criminal activity, including neighborhood watch 
     and citizen patrol programs, sexual assault and domestic 
     violence programs, and programs intended to prevent juvenile 
     crime.
       (D) Establishing or supporting drug courts.
       (E) Establishing early intervention and prevention programs 
     for juveniles to reduce or eliminate crime.
       (F) Enhancing the adjudication process of cases involving 
     violent offenders, including the adjudication process of 
     cases involving violent juvenile offenders.
       (G) Enhancing programs under subpart 1 of part E of the 
     Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968.
       (H) Establishing cooperative task forces between adjoining 
     units of local government to work cooperatively to prevent 
     and combat criminal activity, particularly criminal activity 
     that is exacerbated by drug or gang-related involvement.
       (I) Establishing a multijurisdictional task force, 
     particularly in rural areas, composed of law enforcement 
     officials representing units of local government, that works 
     with Federal law enforcement officials to prevent and control 
     crime.
       (3) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
       (A) the term ``violent offender'' means a person charged 
     with committing a part I violent crime; and
       (B) the term ``drug courts'' means a program that 
     involves--
       (i) continuing judicial supervision over offenders with 
     substance abuse problems who are not violent offenders; and
       (ii) the integrated administration of other sanctions and 
     services, which shall include--

       (I) mandatory periodic testing for the use of controlled 
     substances or other addictive substances during any period of 
     supervised release or probation for each participant;
       (II) substance abuse treatment for each participant;
       (III) probation, or other supervised release involving the 
     possibility of prosecution, confinement, or incarceration 
     based on noncompliance with program requirements or failure 
     to show satisfactory progress; and
       (IV) programmatic, offender management, and aftercare 
     services such as relapse prevention, vocational job training, 
     job placement, and housing placement.

       (b) Prohibited Uses.--Notwithstanding any other provision 
     of this Act, a unit of local government may not expend any of 
     the funds provided under this Act to purchase, lease, rent, 
     or otherwise acquire--
       (1) tanks or armored personnel carriers;
       (2) fixed wing aircraft;
       (3) limousines;
       (4) real estate;
       (5) yachts;
       (6) consultants; or
       (7) vehicles not primarily used for law enforcement;

     unless the Attorney General certifies that extraordinary and 
     exigent circumstances exist that make the use of funds for 
     such purposes essential to the maintenance of public safety 
     and good order in such unit of local government.
       (c) Timing of Payments.--The Director shall pay each unit 
     of local government that has submitted an application under 
     this Act not later than--
       (1) 90 days after the date that the amount is available, or
       (2) the first day of the payment period if the unit of 
     local government has provided the Director with the 
     assurances required by section 4(c),
     whichever is later.
       (d) Adjustments.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Director 
     shall adjust a payment under this Act to a unit of local 
     government to the extent that a prior payment to the unit of 
     local government was more or less than the amount required to 
     be paid.
       (2) Considerations.--The Director may increase or decrease 
     under this subsection a payment to a unit of local government 
     only if the Director determines the need for the increase or 
     decrease, or if the unit requests the increase or decrease, 
     not later than 1 year after the end of the payment period for 
     which a payment was made.

[[Page H7814]]

       (e) Reservation for Adjustment.--The Director may reserve a 
     percentage of not more than 2 percent of the amount under 
     this section for a payment period for all units of local 
     government in a State if the Director considers the reserve 
     is necessary to ensure the availability of sufficient amounts 
     to pay adjustments after the final allocation of amounts 
     among the units of local government in the State.
       (f) Repayment of Unexpended Amounts.--
       (1) Repayment required.--A unit of local government shall 
     repay to the Director, by not later than 27 months after 
     receipt of funds from the Director, any amount that is--
       (A) paid to the unit from amounts appropriated under the 
     authority of this section; and
       (B) not expended by the unit within 2 years after receipt 
     of such funds from the Director.
       (2) Penalty for failure to repay.--If the amount required 
     to be repaid is not repaid, the Director shall reduce payment 
     in future payment periods accordingly.
       (3) Deposit of amounts repaid.--Amounts received by the 
     Director as repayments under this subsection shall be 
     deposited in a designated fund for future payments to units 
     of local government. Any amounts remaining in such designated 
     fund after 5 years following the enactment of the Local 
     Government Law Enforcement Block Grants Act of 2000 shall be 
     applied to the Federal deficit or, if there is no Federal 
     deficit, to reducing the Federal debt.
       (g) Nonsupplanting Requirement.--Funds made available under 
     this Act to units of local government shall not be used to 
     supplant State or local funds, but shall be used to increase 
     the amount of funds that would, in the absence of funds made 
     available under this Act, be made available from State or 
     local sources.
       (h) Matching Funds.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     Federal share of a grant received under this Act may not 
     exceed 90 percent of the costs of a program or proposal 
     funded under this Act.
       (2) Exception for financial hardship.--The Director may 
     increase the Federal share under paragraph (1) up to 100 
     percent for a unit of local government upon a showing of 
     financial hardship by such unit.

     SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this Act--
       (1) $2,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2001;
       (2) $2,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2002;
       (3) $2,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;
       (4) $2,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2004; and
       (5) $2,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2005.
       (b) Oversight Accountability and Administration.--Not more 
     than 3 percent of the amount authorized to be appropriated 
     under subsection (a) for each of the fiscal years 2001 
     through 2005 shall be available to the Attorney General for 
     studying the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the 
     provisions of this Act, and assuring compliance with the 
     provisions of this Act and for administrative costs to carry 
     out the purposes of this Act. The Attorney General shall 
     establish and execute an oversight plan for monitoring the 
     activities of grant recipients. Such sums are to remain 
     available until expended.
       (c) Technology Assistance.--The Attorney General shall 
     reserve 1 percent in each of fiscal years 2001 through 2003 
     of the amount authorized to be appropriated under subsection 
     (a) for use by the National Institute of Justice in assisting 
     local units to identify, select, develop, modernize, and 
     purchase new technologies for use by law enforcement.
       (d) Availability.--The amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated under subsection (a) shall remain available 
     until expended.

     SEC. 4. QUALIFICATION FOR PAYMENT.

       (a) In General.--The Director shall issue regulations 
     establishing procedures under which a unit of local 
     government is required to provide notice to the Director 
     regarding the proposed use of funds made available under this 
     Act.
       (b) Program Review.--The Director shall establish a process 
     for the ongoing evaluation of projects developed with funds 
     made available under this Act.
       (c) General Requirements for Qualification.--A unit of 
     local government qualifies for a payment under this Act for a 
     payment period only if the unit of local government submits 
     an application to the Director and establishes, to the 
     satisfaction of the Director, that--
       (1) the unit of local government has established a local 
     advisory board that--
       (A) includes, but is not limited to, a representative 
     from--
       (i) the local police department or local sheriff's 
     department;
       (ii) the local prosecutor's office;
       (iii) the local court system;
       (iv) the local public school system; and
       (v) a local nonprofit, educational, religious, or community 
     group active in crime prevention or drug use prevention or 
     treatment;
       (B) has reviewed the application; and
       (C) is designated to make nonbinding recommendations to the 
     unit of local government for the use of funds received under 
     this Act;
       (2) the chief executive officer of the State has had not 
     less than 20 days to review and comment on the application 
     prior to submission to the Director;
       (3)(A) the unit of local government will establish a trust 
     fund in which the government will deposit all payments 
     received under this Act; and
       (B) the unit of local government will use amounts in the 
     trust fund (including interest) during a period not to exceed 
     2 years from the date the first grant payment is made to the 
     unit of local government;
       (4) the unit of local government will expend the payments 
     received in accordance with the laws and procedures that are 
     applicable to the expenditure of revenues of the unit of 
     local government;
       (5) the unit of local government will use accounting, 
     audit, and fiscal procedures that conform to guidelines which 
     shall be prescribed by the Director after consultation with 
     the Comptroller General and as applicable, amounts received 
     under this Act shall be audited in compliance with the Single 
     Audit Act of 1984;
       (6) after reasonable notice from the Director or the 
     Comptroller General to the unit of local government, the unit 
     of local government will make available to the Director and 
     the Comptroller General, with the right to inspect, records 
     that the Director reasonably requires to review compliance 
     with this Act or that the Comptroller General reasonably 
     requires to review compliance and operation;
       (7) a designated official of the unit of local government 
     shall make reports the Director reasonably requires, in 
     addition to the annual reports required under this Act;
       (8) the unit of local government will spend the funds made 
     available under this Act only for the purposes set forth in 
     section 2(a)(2);
       (9) the unit of local government will achieve a net gain in 
     the number of law enforcement officers who perform 
     nonadministrative public safety service if such unit uses 
     funds received under this Act to increase the number of law 
     enforcement officers as described under subparagraph (A) of 
     section 2(a)(2);
       (10) the unit of local government--
       (A) has an adequate process to assess the impact of any 
     enhancement of a school security measure that is undertaken 
     under subparagraph (B) of section 2(a)(2), or any crime 
     prevention programs that are established under subparagraphs 
     (C) and (E) of section 2(a)(2), on the incidence of crime in 
     the geographic area where the enhancement is undertaken or 
     the program is established;
       (B) will conduct such an assessment with respect to each 
     such enhancement or program; and
       (C) will submit an annual written assessment report to the 
     Director; and
       (11) the unit of local government has established 
     procedures to give members of the Armed Forces who, on or 
     after October 1, 1990, were or are selected for involuntary 
     separation (as described in section 1141 of title 10, United 
     States Code), approved for separation under section 1174a or 
     1175 of such title, or retired pursuant to the authority 
     provided under section 4403 of the Defense Conversion, 
     Reinvestment, and Transition Assistance Act of 1992 (division 
     D of Public Law 102-484; 10 U.S.C. 1293 note), a suitable 
     preference in the employment of persons as additional law 
     enforcement officers or support personnel using funds made 
     available under this Act. The nature and extent of such 
     employment preference shall be jointly established by the 
     Attorney General and the Secretary of Defense. To the extent 
     practicable, the Director shall endeavor to inform members 
     who were separated between October 1, 1990, and the date of 
     the enactment of this section of their eligibility for the 
     employment preference;
       (d) Sanctions for Noncompliance.--
       (1) In general.--If the Director determines that a unit of 
     local government has not complied substantially with the 
     requirements or regulations prescribed under subsections (a) 
     and (c), the Director shall notify the unit of local 
     government that if the unit of local government does not take 
     corrective action within 60 days of such notice, the Director 
     will withhold additional payments to the unit of local 
     government for the current and future payment periods until 
     the Director is satisfied that the unit of local government--
       (A) has taken the appropriate corrective action; and
       (B) will comply with the requirements and regulations 
     prescribed under subsections (a) and (c).
       (2) Notice.--Before giving notice under paragraph (1), the 
     Director shall give the chief executive officer of the unit 
     of local government reasonable notice and an opportunity for 
     comment.
       (e) Maintenance of Effort Requirement.--A unit of local 
     government qualifies for a payment under this Act for a 
     payment period only if the unit's expenditures on law 
     enforcement services (as reported by the Bureau of the 
     Census) for the fiscal year preceding the fiscal year in 
     which the payment period occurs were not less than 90 
     percent of the unit's expenditures on such services for 
     the second fiscal year preceding the fiscal year in which 
     the payment period occurs.

     SEC. 5. ALLOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS.

       (a) State Set-Aside.--
       (1) In general.--Of the total amounts appropriated for this 
     Act for each payment period, the Director shall allocate for 
     units of local government in each State an amount that bears 
     the same ratio to such total as the average annual number of 
     part 1 violent crimes reported by such State to the Federal 
     Bureau of Investigation for the 3 most recent calendar years 
     for which such data is available, bears to the number of part 
     1 violent crimes reported by all States to the Federal Bureau 
     of Investigation for such years.

[[Page H7815]]

       (2) Minimum requirement.--Each State shall receive not less 
     than .25 percent of the total amounts appropriated under 
     section 3 under this subsection for each payment period.
       (3) Proportional reduction.--If amounts available to carry 
     out paragraph (2) for any payment period are insufficient to 
     pay in full the total payment that any State is otherwise 
     eligible to receive under paragraph (1) for such period, then 
     the Director shall reduce payments under paragraph (1) for 
     such payment period to the extent of such insufficiency. 
     Reductions under the preceding sentence shall be allocated 
     among the States (other than States whose payment is 
     determined under paragraph (2)) in the same proportions as 
     amounts would be allocated under paragraph (1) without regard 
     to paragraph (2).
       (b) Local Distribution.--
       (1) In general.--From the amount reserved for each State 
     under subsection (a), the Director shall allocate--
       (A) among reporting units of local government the reporting 
     units' share of such reserved amount, and
       (B) among nonreporting units of local government the 
     nonreporting units' share of the reserved amount.
       (2) Amounts.--
       (A) The reporting units' share of the reserved amount is 
     the amount equal to the product of such reserved amount 
     multiplied by the percentage which the population living in 
     reporting units of local government in the State bears to the 
     population of all units of local government in the State.
       (B) The nonreporting units' share of the reserved amount is 
     the reserved amount reduced by the reporting units' share of 
     the reserved amount.
       (3) Allocation to each reporting unit.--From the reporting 
     units' share of the reserved amount for each State under 
     subsection (a), the Director shall allocate to each reporting 
     unit of local government an amount which bears the same ratio 
     to such share as the average annual number of part 1 violent 
     crimes reported by such unit to the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation for the 3 most recent calendar years for which 
     such data is available bears to the number of part 1 violent 
     crimes reported by all units of local government in the State 
     in which the unit is located to the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation for such years.
       (4) Allocation to each nonreporting unit.--From the 
     nonreporting units' share of the reserved amount for each 
     State under subsection (a), the Director shall allocate to 
     each nonreporting unit of local government an amount which 
     bears the same ratio to such share as the average number of 
     part 1 violent crimes of like governmental units in the same 
     population class as such unit bears to the average annual 
     imputed number of part 1 violent crimes of all nonreporting 
     units in the State for the 3 most recent calendar years.
       (5) Limitation on allocations.--A unit of local government 
     shall not receive an allocation which exceeds 100 percent of 
     such unit's expenditures on law enforcement services as 
     reported by the Bureau of the Census for the most recent 
     fiscal year. Any amount in excess of 100 percent of such 
     unit's expenditures on law enforcement services shall be 
     distributed proportionally among units of local government 
     whose allocation does not exceed 100 percent of expenditures 
     on law enforcement services.
       (6) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
       (A) The term `reporting unit of local government' means any 
     unit of local government that reported part 1 violent crimes 
     to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for the 3 most recent 
     calendar years for which such data is available.
       (B) The term `nonreporting unit of local government' means 
     any unit of local government which is not a reporting unit of 
     local government.
       (C)(i) The term `like governmental units' means any like 
     unit of local government as defined by the Secretary of 
     Commerce for general statistical purposes, and means--
       (I) all counties are treated as like governmental units;
       (II) all cities are treated as like governmental units;
       (III) all townships are treated as like governmental units.
       (ii) Similar rules shall apply to other types of 
     governmental units.
       (D) The term `same population class' means a like unit 
     within the same population category as another like unit with 
     the categories determined as follows:
       (i) 0 through 9,999.
       (ii) 10,000 through 49,999.
       (iii) 50,000 through 149,999.
       (iv) 150,000 through 299,999.
       (v) 300,000 or more.
       (7) Local governments with allocations of less than 
     $10,000.--If under paragraph (3) or (4) a unit of local 
     government is allotted less than $10,000 for the payment 
     period, the amount allotted shall be transferred to the chief 
     executive officer of the State who shall distribute such 
     funds among State police departments that provide law 
     enforcement services to units of local government and units 
     of local government whose allotment is less than such amount 
     in a manner which reduces crime and improves public safety.
       (8) Special rules.--
       (A) If a unit of local government in a State that has been 
     incorporated since the date of the collection of the data 
     used by the Director in making allocations pursuant to this 
     section, such unit shall be treated as a nonreporting unit of 
     local government for purposes of this subsection.
       (B) If a unit of local government in the State has been 
     annexed since the date of the collection of the data used by 
     the Director in making allocations pursuant to this section, 
     the Director shall pay the amount that would have been 
     allocated to such unit of local government to the unit of 
     local government that annexed it.
       (9) Resolution of disparate allocations.--(A) 
     Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, if--
       (i) the attorney general of a State certifies that a unit 
     of local government under the jurisdiction of the State bears 
     more than 50 percent of the costs of prosecution or 
     incarceration that arise with respect to part 1 violent 
     crimes reported by a specified geographically constituent 
     unit of local government, and
       (ii) but for this paragraph, the amount of funds allocated 
     under this section to--
       (I) any one such specified geographically constituent unit 
     of local government exceeds 200 percent of the amount 
     allocated to the unit of local government certified pursuant 
     to clause (i), or
       (II) more than one such specified geographically 
     constituent unit of local government (excluding units of 
     local government referred to subclause I and in paragraph 
     (7)), exceeds 400 percent of the amount allocated to the unit 
     of local government certified pursuant to clause (i) and the 
     attorney general of the State determines that such allocation 
     is likely to threaten the efficient administration of 
     justice,

     then in order to qualify for payment under this Act, the unit 
     of local government certified pursuant to clause (i), 
     together with any such specified geographically constituent 
     units of local government described in clause (ii), shall 
     submit to the Director a joint application for the aggregate 
     of funds allocated to such units of local government. Such 
     application shall specify the amount of such funds that are 
     to be distributed to each of the units of local government 
     and the purposes for which such funds are to be used. The 
     units of local government involved may establish a joint 
     local advisory board for the purposes of carrying out this 
     paragraph.
       (B) In this paragraph, the term ``geographically 
     constituent unit of local government'' means a unit of local 
     government that has jurisdiction over areas located within 
     the boundaries of an area over which a unit of local 
     government certified pursuant to clause (i) has jurisdiction.
       (c) Unavailability and Inaccuracy of Information.--
       (1) Data for states.--For purposes of this section, if data 
     regarding part 1 violent crimes in any State for the 3 most 
     recent calendar years is unavailable or substantially 
     inaccurate, the Director shall utilize the best available 
     comparable data regarding the number of violent crimes for 
     such years for such State for the purposes of allocation of 
     any funds under this Act.
       (2) Possible inaccuracy of data for units of local 
     government.--In addition to the provisions of paragraph (1), 
     if the Director believes that the reported rate of part 1 
     violent crimes for a unit of local government is inaccurate, 
     the Director shall--
       (A) investigate the methodology used by such unit to 
     determine the accuracy of the submitted data; and
       (B) when necessary, use the best available comparable data 
     regarding the number of violent crimes for such years for 
     such unit of local government.

     SEC. 6. UTILIZATION OF PRIVATE SECTOR.

       Funds or a portion of funds allocated under this Act may be 
     utilized to contract with private, nonprofit entities or 
     community-based organizations to carry out the purposes 
     specified under section 2(a)(2).

     SEC. 7. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.

       (a) In General.--A unit of local government expending 
     payments under this Act shall hold not less than 1 public 
     hearing on the proposed use of the payment from the Director 
     in relation to its entire budget.
       (b) Views.--At the hearing, persons shall be given an 
     opportunity to provide written and oral views to the unit of 
     local government authority responsible for enacting the 
     budget and to ask questions about the entire budget and the 
     relation of the payment from the Director to the entire 
     budget.
       (c) Time and Place.--The unit of local government shall 
     hold the hearing at a time and place that allows and 
     encourages public attendance and participation.

     SEC. 8. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.

       The administrative provisions of part H of the Omnibus 
     Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, shall apply to 
     this Act and for purposes of this section any reference in 
     such provisions to title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and 
     Safe Streets Act of 1968 shall be deemed to be a reference to 
     this Act.

     SEC. 9. DEFINITIONS.

       For the purposes of this Act:
       (1) The term ``unit of local government'' means--
       (A) a county, township, city, or political subdivision of a 
     county, township, or city, that is a unit of local government 
     as determined by the Secretary of Commerce for general 
     statistical purposes; and
       (B) the District of Columbia and the recognized governing 
     body of an Indian tribe or Alaskan Native village that 
     carries out substantial governmental duties and powers.
       (2) The term ``payment period'' means each 1-year period 
     beginning on October 1 of any

[[Page H7816]]

     year in which a grant under this Act is awarded.
       (3) The term ``State'' means any State of the United 
     States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto 
     Rico, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the 
     Northern Mariana Islands.
       (4) The term ``juvenile'' means an individual who is 17 
     years of age or younger.
       (5) The term ``part 1 violent crimes'' means murder and 
     nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and 
     aggravated assault as reported to the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation for purposes of the Uniform Crime Reports.
       (6) The term ``Director'' means the Director of the Bureau 
     of Justice Assistance.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Hutchinson) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hutchinson).


                             General Leave

  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks on H.R. 4999.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Arkansas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the Local Government Law Enforcement Act of 2000 
represents an important step by this Congress to assist local 
governments throughout the country as they confront crime. In stark 
contrast to the 1994 Crime Act, it does so without prescribing the 
specific programs localities must implement in order to receive 
funding.
  This bill provides resources to localities to respond to their unique 
crime problems with their own unique solutions.
  The text of H.R. 4999 is nearly identical to the reauthorization 
passed by the House of Representatives in February of 1995. There are 
two differences between this bill and the previous reauthorization.
  First of all, the previous reauthorization as passed sought to repeal 
the COPS program. This bill does not do that.

                              {time}  1645

  It authorizes the block grants without in any way affecting the COPS. 
That is one difference. The second difference is that under the 
previous reauthorization and this bill, both include a 10 percent local 
match requirement, whereby the Federal share may not exceed 90 percent 
of the cost of a program proposed funding under the act. However, only 
H.R. 4999 includes a waiver exception in cases of financial hardship. 
Therefore, a unit can have its matching requirement waived upon a 
showing of financial hardship.
  We should make no mistake that this bill will provide money for our 
law enforcement fighting efforts with greater flexibility to the vast 
majority of localities throughout America. Those who argue that this 
money will be wasted are completely wrong. This is not a grant program 
for police chiefs like the old Law Enforcement Assistance 
Administration. This is a grant program that assists communities in 
addressing their crime problems. It does so through a highly visible 
process involving all the major law enforcement, judicial and private 
sector voices in the community. There is a role for the Federal 
Government to assist the States in the fight against crime, but such 
assistance must appreciate that the problems vary from State to State 
and community to community. We must avoid a one-size-fits-all approach, 
even as we reject micromanagement support from Washington that comes at 
the expense of flexibility.
  The act leaves to local governments the decisions regarding what 
their funding priorities should be. It neither requires that funds be 
spent on police officers nor on prevention programs. It leaves that 
decision to local governments who understand their crime problems far 
better than we do. Under this bill, localities can fund police on the 
beat or prevention activities or anything in between. The act simply 
requires that those funds be used to reduce crime and improve public 
safety.
  I will not go through all the different sections of the bill, Mr. 
Speaker; but I believe that the Local Government Law Enforcement Act is 
an important way for the Federal Government to assist localities in 
dealing with crime without getting in their way. It is a rejection of 
the ``Washington knows best'' mind-set and it provides more resources 
for the counties, cities, and towns of America to develop homegrown 
solutions to their unique crime problems.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise not only to express my support for H.R. 4999 but 
also to express my disappointment that the bill under consideration on 
the floor today is being considered without committee consideration. 
Among the constructive purposes authorized in the bill are the hiring, 
training, and equipping of police and other law enforcement personnel 
and the establishment of crime prevention, early intervention, and drug 
court programs. The bill specifically contains prohibitions on buying 
things like tanks, airplanes, yachts, and limousines which could have 
been purchased under some of the former programs that the gentleman 
from Arkansas referenced.
  While I support the reauthorization contained in the bill, I had 
hoped that we would be looking at a program at the committee level 
along with other important law enforcement programs such as the 
Community Oriented Policing Services program, better known as the COPS 
program. The COPS program has been very successful and considered to be 
a vital contributor to the success of local communities in bringing 
down the crime rate all across the country.
  The gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner), a member of the House 
Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime introduced an authorization bill for 
the COPS program which had the support of the administration and a 
significant number of other Members of the House. I know that the law 
enforcement community which strongly supports the Weiner bill would 
have preferred to see both of these matters taken up in committee with 
both coming to the floor for an authorization based on a full 
assessment of their value to the local communities. Unfortunately, that 
did not happen and here we are with just this part of the bill.
  But before closing, Mr. Speaker, I would want to thank the gentleman 
from Arkansas for accommodating the concerns of the gentleman from Guam 
(Mr. Underwood) involving the formula for the appropriation. 
Inadvertently, the bill that we were to bring to the floor had an 
outdated allocation for Guam, but the bill before us now includes the 
updated allocation. Thanks to the alertness and effectiveness of the 
gentleman from Guam, we were able to correct this oversight.
  Mr. Speaker, although the bill does not contain the COPS program, I 
support the bill because it includes authorization for valuable, 
effective crime prevention initiatives which will be developed on the 
local level. I urge my colleagues to vote aye on the bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I just wanted to thank the gentleman from Virginia for his comments 
in support of this legislation. I also just wanted to remark that the 
gentleman from Virginia has certainly been an ardent worker in the 
issues of crime, both in his work on the subcommittee but also I have 
attended numerous hearings across the country with him and he has 
certainly devoted himself to this issue. The gentleman raised the issue 
of the COPS program, Community Oriented Policing Services program. We 
have held hearings in committee. It is true that we have not moved 
forward the bill to reauthorize his program, but as the gentleman 
knows, there has been some concern expressed about the effectiveness of 
the program. It was originally planned as a program with a fixed end to 
it. And so I think it is appropriate, just expressing my view, that at 
this juncture we wait until the next administration, wherever that 
might take us, to see exactly where we are going to go on that 
particular issue.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Kentucky (Mr. Fletcher), who has done an extraordinary job in 
pushing this legislation. Without his leadership

[[Page H7817]]

on this issue, I do not think we would be here today talking about 
this.
  Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. 
Hutchinson) for yielding me this time, and I certainly thank the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) for his support of this. I also 
want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) for all the 
work that he has done on this and the Subcommittee on Crime and the 
staff there that has done a lot of work on this.
  As it stands right now, we have had a program similar to this 
instituted; it has been through the appropriations. We have never had 
it fully authorized. We passed a bill similar to this or it was passed 
in Congress before I was here, at least on the House but never on the 
Senate side. So we are hoping very much that we can get this bill fully 
authorized, fully passed to authorize this program with the appropriate 
changes that have been made here.
  First of all, it allocates $2 billion a year for the fiscal years 
2001 through 2005. We also understand as far as the improvements, they 
have already been mentioned, these as far as providing block grants 
back to local law enforcement agencies, it ensures that those 
communities, those poor communities that are not able to meet that 
match requirement previously will not be precluded from getting these 
block grants because of a waiver that we have instituted. I know this 
is going to be particularly helpful for our State of Kentucky. We have 
several communities that may need certain items for safety or police 
officers or other crime prevention programs, and yet they may not be 
able to meet that 10 percent match sometimes. So in those hardship 
cases, they are able to receive this grant which previously was 
unavailable to them. We are glad that that change was able to be 
instituted.
  Why have we had so much emphasis on crime? I am glad to say that over 
the last 8 years we have seen a decrease in crime in this country, but 
if we look back as early as 1960, from 1960 or 1964 up to 1991, 1992, 
we had a 600 percent increase in crime in this country, a tremendous 
increase in crime. Seventy to 80 percent of all families were affected 
by crime, many types of crimes. Certainly it has affected our region.
  I reference an article we had recently in Lexington, Kentucky, where 
we have particular needs. I think it points out the diversity of 
communities and the diverse needs communities have where it says the 
crime in Lexington increased in 1999 and that probably happened in 
other communities around the country. We can see from the diversity of 
problems that we have across the Nation that a plan that implements 
just a one-size-fits-all is not best for particular communities.
  I think, clearly, the Federal Government certainly has a role; but 
the best crime prevention needs to come locally where they understand 
the particular problems that they have. That is what makes this program 
so effective and really so popular among law enforcement agencies and 
other institutions that work to prevent and reduce crime.
  In Kentucky, we have already received $4.2 million in grants from 
this program. Almost $1 million has gone to our State police in 
Kentucky. Over half a million has gone to my district alone. In these 
we have used funds to hire police and to pay overtime. We have used the 
funds to purchase other law enforcement equipment and increased the 
technology that allows them to more effectively prevent and detect 
crimes. And we have used it to establish crime prevention programs that 
otherwise would not be able to be afforded or be available for the 
communities. So it is very important.
  I am certainly pleased that we have a tremendous amount of bipartisan 
support on this bill, the approach to reduce crime by ensuring that we 
provide flexibility to local law enforcement agencies and organizations 
and that we understand that we can bring certainly the priority of 
crime prevention from the Federal level but many of the decisions need 
to be made at the local level to ensure that we do effectively fight 
crime, reduce crime in this country, and make this a safer Nation for 
all people. I encourage everyone to vote for this bill.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Shimkus). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hutchinson) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 4999, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________