[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 97 (Thursday, July 12, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7592-S7594]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Hatch, and Mr. Kennedy):
  S. 1174. A bill to provide for safe incarceration of juvenile 
offenders; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce with Senator 
Hatch legislation that addresses the problems caused by housing 
juveniles who are prosecuted in the criminal justice system in adult 
correctional facilities. In addition, this legislation reauthorizes the 
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, to maintain the core 
protections afforded to juveniles who are adjudicated delinquent and 
detained in the juvenile court system. This two-pronged approach will 
help ensure that we treat juvenile offenders with appropriate severity, 
but also in a way that assists States in providing safe conditions for 
their confinement and appropriate access to educational, vocational, 
and health programs that address the needs of juveniles. Improving 
conditions for juveniles today will improve the public safety in the 
future, as juveniles who are not exposed to adult inmates have a lower 
likelihood of committing future crimes.
  The Justice Department reported last fall that of the 50 States and 
the District of Columbia, 44 house juveniles in adult jails and 
prisons, and 26 of those do not maintain designated youthful offender 
housing units. As a nation, we are relying increasingly on adult 
facilities to house juveniles; for example, according to the Bureau of 
Justice Statistics' survey of jails, there was a 35 percent increase in 
the number of juveniles held in adult jails between 1994 and 1997. I 
believe that there is a will in the States to improve conditions for 
these juveniles, but resources are often lacking. The Federal 
Government can play a useful role by providing funding to States that 
want to take account of the differences between juveniles and adults.
  Although many juvenile offenders serving time in adult prisons have 
committed extraordinarily serious offenses, others are there because of 
relatively minor crimes and will be released at a young age. According 
to the

[[Page S7593]]

1999 report of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 
Prevention, 22 percent of juveniles committed to State prisons were 
there because they had committed property crimes, 11 percent because 
they committed drug-related crimes, and only 25 percent because they 
had committed murder, kidnaping, sexual assault or assault. Certainly, 
many of those juveniles can be convinced not to commit further crimes. 
The social and moral cost of not making that attempt is simply 
incalculable.
  There is stunning statistical evidence that something is deeply wrong 
with our current approach to incarcerating juveniles. According to the 
Justice Department, the suicide rate for juveniles held in adult jails 
is five times the rate in the general youth population and eight times 
the rate for adolescents in juvenile detention facilities. Juveniles in 
adult facilities are also more likely to be violently victimized. 
Sexual assault was five times more likely than in juvenile facilities, 
beatings by staff nearly twice as likely, and attacks with weapons 
almost 50 percent more common.
  Moreover, many scholars have questioned whether housing juvenile 
offenders with adult inmates serves our long-term interest in public 
safety. Multiple studies have shown that youth transferred to the adult 
system recidivate at higher rates and with more serious offenses than 
youth who have committed similar offenses but are retained in the 
juvenile justice system. Some would suggest that we should not be 
transferring youth to the adult system at all, and I am sympathetic to 
that view. But that is a decision our States must make, and for now 
most of our States have taken the contrary position. At the very least, 
then, we must ensure that juveniles are treated humanely in the 
criminal justice system to reduce the risks that upon release they will 
commit additional and more serious crimes. One of the ways we can do 
that is by helping States improve confinement conditions.
  The problem this bill is intended to address cannot be described 
simply through statistics or academic studies. The compelling stories 
of young people who have been part of the corrections system should 
command our attention. For example, United Press International and 
numerous newspapers have reported the story of 15-year-old Robert, who 
was held in a Kentucky adult jail for the minor infraction of truancy 
and petty theft. One night during his time there, Robert wrapped one 
end of his shirt around his neck, and one around the cell bars, and 
hanged himself. The county has now agreed not to house juveniles and 
adults together.
  The New York Times magazine last year told the story of Jessica, who 
at 14 was the youngest female in the Florida correctional system and, 
within her first few weeks in prison, tried to commit suicide. Jessica 
was then transferred to a rougher Miami prison where she does not 
receive psychological counseling or attend class to get her GED. 
Jessica has found an extensive surrogate prison family whom she turns 
to for advice. The woman she refers to as ``Mommy'' is serving a life 
sentence for murder. Jessica will be released at age 22 with no 
education beyond the sixth grade, no job skills, and no life experience 
outside of prison after age 13. Now some will point out that Jessica 
committed a serious criminal offense she and two older teenagers robbed 
her grandparents and she deserves harsh punishment. And I agree that we 
must deal severely with such crimes. But the fact remains that when 
Jessica is released from prison she will be 22, with an entire adult 
life ahead of her. I believe it is critical for the public safety for 
her and others like her to have options besides a life of crime.
  The Miami Herald reported the stories of Joseph Tejera and Rebekah 
Homerston. Tejera was sentenced as an adult for a burglary offense, and 
was placed in an adult prison instead of an intensive juvenile program 
where he would have received 24-hour supervision, had access to 
educational and other programs, and been surrounded by other juveniles. 
Instead, at the age of 16 and weighing 135 pounds, he was surrounded by 
adult inmates who constantly tried to beat him up. Despite a sterling 
disciplinary record, he was involved in five fights because of the 
aggressiveness of adult inmates. Homerston was the daughter of a father 
serving life in prison for sex crimes against minors and a mother 
arrested for theft and drunk driving. At the age of 13, she ran away 
from home, and lived on the streets of Fort Lauderdale. At 15, she too 
was prosecuted and sentenced to a two-year term as an adult after 
vandalizing the city's recreation center. Upon her release from that 
prison term, she was arrested at age 16 for shoplifting a shirt, and is 
now serving three and a half years in an adult facility for that 
offense. While in prison, she has witnessed numerous suicide attempts.
  Housing juveniles with adult inmates creates problems not just for 
the juveniles involved. Such policies also create difficulties for 
corrections administrators, whose prisons and jails often lack the 
physical structure, programs, and trained personnel to manage a mixed 
juvenile-adult population. John Gorsik, the head of the Department of 
Corrections in my State of Vermont, has advised that corrections 
officials from around the nation dislike having juveniles in their 
facilities. These officials often become responsible for delivering 
those services to which juveniles are entitled, including special 
education services. As one report on Youth in the Criminal Justice 
System recently recommended: ``Administrative staff and people in 
policy making positions dealing with youth in the adult system should 
have education, training, and experience regarding the distinctive 
characteristics of children and adolescents.'' This bill would provide 
for such education and training to make the jobs of corrections 
officials around the nation easier. In addition, the presence of 
juveniles among adult inmates can lead to increased disciplinary 
problems and the inculcation of a criminal mentality in young, highly 
impressionable offenders like Jessica. Our prisons and jails are too 
often becoming schools for young lawbreakers.
  I would like to explain how this bill addresses confinement 
conditions for juveniles.
  Title I: The first title of this bill creates a new incentive grant 
program for State and local governments and Indian tribes. These grants 
can be used for the following purposes related to juveniles under the 
jurisdiction of an adult criminal court: (a) alter existing 
correctional facilities, or develop separate facilities, to provide 
segregated facilities for them, (b) provide orientation and ongoing 
training for correctional staff supervising them, (c) provide monitors 
who will report on their treatment, and (d) provide them with access to 
educational programs, vocational training, mental and physical health 
assessment and treatment, and drug treatment. Grants can also be used 
to seek alternatives to housing juveniles with adult inmates, including 
the expansion of juvenile facilities.
  It is important to note that States that choose not to house 
juveniles who are convicted as adults with adult inmates are still 
eligible for grants under this bill. For example, they could use the 
money to train staff, or to provide educational or other programs for 
juveniles, or to improve juvenile facilities.
  Applicants for these grants must provide a detailed plan explaining 
how they will improve conditions for juveniles in their adult 
corrections system. Let me be clear: the purpose of this grant program 
is not to fuel a prison-building boom, or to make it easier for States 
to prosecute juveniles as adults, but to improve conditions for 
juveniles. States will need to take this purpose into account in making 
their grant proposals. Moreover, to be eligible for a grant, States 
must have developed guidelines on the appropriate use of force against 
incarcerated juveniles, and must also have prohibited the use of 
electroshock devices, chemical restraints and punishment, and 4-point 
restraints. The use of such punishment is inconsistent with our 
commitments to treating juveniles humanely, and is at variance with the 
very purpose of this grant program. Every State that can meet the 
requirements of the grant program will receive funding under 
this title, and rural representation is guaranteed.

  Title II: The second title of the bill authorizes States to use their 
Violent Offender Incarceration/Truth in Sentencing (VOI/TIS) grant 
money to improve the treatment of juveniles under

[[Page S7594]]

the jurisdiction of the adult criminal justice system. It also offers 
States an incentive to use a substantial percentage of their VOI/TIS 
money for that purpose. States that use 10 percent of their grant money 
to improve juvenile conditions will receive a bonus of 5 percent above 
the amount to which they are otherwise entitled under that program. The 
money can be used to alter existing facilities to provide separate 
space for juveniles under the jurisdiction of an adult criminal court, 
or to provide training and supervision of corrections officials and 
reporting on juvenile conditions. This title, in conjunction with Title 
I, allows us to make improving conditions for juveniles a national 
priority by working through the States. No State will be forced to use 
their money for this purpose or see their funding reduced if they 
choose not to. But those States that do make a serious effort in this 
regard will be rewarded.
  Title III: The third title of this bill reauthorizes the Juvenile 
Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. Under the JJDPA, States 
receiving federal funds must maintain core protections for detained 
juveniles. These protections include ``sight'' and ``sound'' separation 
between those in the juvenile detention system and adult offenders. 
Children cannot be put in adjoining cells with adults, or placed in 
circumstances that allow them to be subject to threats and verbal abuse 
from adults in dining halls, recreation areas, and other common spaces. 
In addition to establishing sight and sound separation, the JJDPA 
provides three additional core protections: (1) removal of juveniles 
from adult jails or lockups, with a 24-hour exception for rural areas 
and other exceptions for travel and weather-related conditions; (2) 
deinstitutionalization of status offenders; and (3) efforts toward 
reducing the disproportionate confinement of minority youth in the 
juvenile justice system.
  I am very pleased that Senator Hatch has agreed with me that we need 
a straightforward reauthorization of the JJDPA. He and I both worked 
very hard in the last Congress to reauthorize that law, and our efforts 
were sidetracked by numerous factors.
  Title IV: Finally, the fourth title of this bill contains a number of 
provisions that I would like to highlight today. First, it authorizes 
funding for rural States and economically distressed communities that 
lack the resources to provide secure custody for juvenile offenders. 
Second, this title calls for a study on the effect of sentencing 
juvenile drug offenders as adults. Many have raised concerns about the 
toll taken on some of our communities, especially those in poorer 
areas, by lengthy drug sentences. There is no question that the 
proliferation of illegal drugs over the last 20 years has presented a 
social crisis with particularly serious effects on poor and urban 
communities. But we need to take a systematic look at whether our 
approach to that crisis has been effective and fair, and the study in 
this bill should be part of that effort. Third, this bill instructs the 
General Accounting Office to prepare a report on the prevalence and 
effects of the use of electroshock weapons, 4-point restraints, 
chemical restraints, restraint chairs, and solitary confinement against 
juvenile offenders in both the Federal and State corrections systems. I 
am deeply concerned about the disciplinary methods being used against 
juvenile offenders in the U.S., and I believe it is important for 
Congress to receive an accounting of the problem so we can consider 
whether further legislation in this area is appropriate. Fourth, this 
title reauthorizes the Family Unity Demonstration Project, which 
provides funding for projects allowing eligible prisoners who are 
parents to live in structured, community-based centers with their young 
children. A study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics found that about 
two-thirds of incarcerated women were parents of children under 18 
years old. According to the White House, on any given day, America is 
home to 1.5 million children of prisoners. And according to Prison 
Fellowship Industries, more than half of the juveniles in custody in 
the United States had an immediate family member behind bars. This is a 
serious problem, and reauthorizing the Family Unity Demonstration 
Project will help us address it.
  I would like to thank numerous people who have worked with me and my 
staff on this proposal: Ken Schatz of the Vermont Children and Family 
Council, Marc Schindler and Mark Soler of the Youth Law Center, David 
Doi of the Coalition for Juvenile Justice, Jill Ward from the 
Children's Defense Fund, and John Gorsik and John Perry at the Vermont 
Department of Corrections. Without their help, I would not be able to 
introduce this bill today.
  In conclusion, let me say that Congress must act to ensure that 
minimum standards are created in as many States as possible to 
ameliorate the problems resulting from sentencing juveniles as adults. 
I think this bipartisan bill accomplishes that goal, and I urge the 
Senate to give its full consideration, and its approval, to this 
proposal.
                                 ______