[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 167 (Wednesday, December 5, 2001)]
[House]
[Pages H8893-H8894]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1745
                              HATE CRIMES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to offer 
my thoughts on the importance of passing in this body hate crimes 
legislation, but also to ask this House to prioritize its work. 
Inasmuch as we can spend an enormous amount of time on some very valid 
initiatives, I do believe that hate crimes legislation, the passage of 
hate crimes legislation that has been offered in two previous 
congressional sessions, is long overdue and it is not being passed.
  I heard a colleague of mine just earlier today talk about the climate 
in which we live. All of us have stood up against terrorism and have 
given to the President the authority to ferret out terrorism and to 
bring to justice those who perpetrated the unspeakable crime on 
September 11, 2001. But, likewise, we have spoken against the 
indictment of the Islamic faith and all Muslims. We realize that 
Muslims are not the crux of our problem inasmuch as the virtues of 
their faith talk about peace and justice.
  I would say that we experienced over the past weekend some terrible 
tragedies, terrible loss of life in the Mideast. It does us no good as 
well to speak hate against either the Israelis or the PLO. In fact, it 
is most important that we look to speak to the issues of peace and 
reconciliation and bringing people together.
  Our first step to acknowledge to the world that we will not harbor 
hate is to pass our own hate crimes legislation so that we can say to 
the world we argue and fight against hate in this Nation, and we will 
stand against hate in the world. We cannot cry in a one-sided manner. 
We must cry for all of those who lose their life.
  So, as we talk about the passage of hate crimes legislation, let us 
be reminded that we have those brothers and sisters within our 
boundaries who feel that they have been discriminated against because 
of their faith. We may have brothers and sisters around the world who 
feel that these tragedies that have occurred, that we have somewhat not 
understood their crisis and that we do not look to seek peace. I would 
argue that we can find peace here in this Nation and a recognition and 
reconciliation of our opposition to hate by passing the hate crimes 
legislation, and we can do so by speaking to all parties who would come 
to the table of peace to design peace in the Mideast and to design 
peace in Afghanistan.
  The hate crimes legislation that is so needed in this country would 
address the question of Leonard Clark, a 13-year-old African American 
teenager who was riding his bicycle one day in Chicago when he was 
accosted and brutally beaten by three white teenagers. The perpetrators 
have been charged with attempted murder, aggravated battery and hate 
crimes under the Illinois State law. However, the irony in this case is 
that one of the key witnesses to the beating remains missing. A Federal 
hate crimes law would have allowed for the full involvement of the FBI 
in this case, thereby increasing the chances of capture and justice.
  In my own congressional district in Houston in 1995, Fred Mangione, a 
homosexual, was stabbed to death, and his companion was brutally 
assaulted. The two men who were charged with Mangione's murder claimed 
to be members of the German Peace Corps, which has been characterized 
in media reports as a neo-Nazi organization based in California. At the 
time, this crime did not meet the State of Texas threshold for trial as 
a capital offense because the murder did not occur during the 
commission of a rape or robbery. Justice failed us during that time 
frame.
  I am very gratified to say that since that time and since the brutal 
beating and killing and dismemberment of James Byrd, Jr., we have 
passed the James Byrd, Jr., Hate Crimes Act in Texas. It was passed by 
Republicans and Democrats and signed by a Republican Governor.
  So I speak tonight not in one voice. I speak to all of my colleagues, 
and I am gratified that the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) has 
offered legislation and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) 
continues to bring us together so that we can speak in one voice.
  But even as we speak, we are still facing attacks on our own American 
citizens and those within our boundaries, such as the statistics of 
1995, 2,212 attacks on lesbians and gay men were documented, an 8 
percent increase over the previous year. There have also been numerous 
attacks on people of various backgrounds, whether they have been Jews 
or Asians, Hispanics, Native Americans or anyone that has been 
different in our community. The hate crimes prevention act will protect 
these groups from targeted attacks because they are members of these 
groups. They likewise would protect women and others on the grounds of 
difference.
  Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleagues today in simply saying we can 
fight hatred with our own changed hearts, but as well we can provide 
changed laws for America and pass the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 
2001 or 2002.

[[Page H8894]]

  Mr. Speaker, the tragic events of September 11 have compelled this 
great country of ours to join efforts and resources in healing the 
wounds and rebuilding lives. Our love for America was never more 
evident than in the days and months subsequent to September 11. Flags 
are flown daily even embroidered on clothing. We cannot stop showing 
our love for our country.
  Yet expressing our deep affections for our country and what we have 
had to endure, must include ALL Americans. It must not be exclusionary, 
but rather include all races, creeds, gender, and sexual orientation.
  When Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence he stated 
that, ``We hold these truths to be self evident that all Men Are 
created Equal.'' Women, African Americans, Native Americans, Hispanic 
Americans, Asian Americans, and Jewish Americans have been too often 
historically, culturally, and prospectively excluded from inclusion in 
that declaration.
  President Abraham Lincoln stated so eloquently in his Gettysburg 
Address, ``Our Nation must struggle . . . in order to create a more 
perfect union''. The problem with our struggle today is our judiciary 
system's inability to effectively address violent acts of hate crime in 
our society. It is particularly difficult because there is no current 
law that makes a hate crime a federal offense. We need Hate Crimes 
legislation to ``create a more perfect union.''
  Early in 1987, a public controversy developed between William 
Bradford Reynolds, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division, 
and prominent civil rights advocates. Reynolds stated that racial 
violence was not increasing, basing his assertion on informal surveys 
of Federal prosecutors and the number of civil rights complaints being 
filed with the Justice Department. Civil rights advocates asserted the 
contrary, that racial violence was in fact increasing, basing their 
assertions on data supplied by the Justice Department's own Community 
Relations Service, which reportedly indicated a rise from 99 racial 
incidents in 1980 to 276 in 1986.
  This controversy ultimately led to the passage of the Hate Crime 
Statistics Act, enacted April 23, 1990. This law required the FBI to 
collect, compile, and publish statistics on hate motivated crime. Since 
then, Federal legislation has moved beyond data collection on the 
incidence of hate crime activity, to include new provisions requiring 
stiffer penalties for bias-motivated criminal activity. Also, it has 
designated a new category of individuals, to include those with 
disabilities.
  According to the Hate Crimes Statistics Act, a hate crime is defined 
as acts which individuals are victimized because of their ``race, 
religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity.'' In this statute, hate 
crimes are those in which ``the defendant intentionally selects a 
victim, or in the case of a property crime, the property that is the 
object of the crime, because of the actual or perceived race, color, 
religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual 
orientation of any person.
  But despite our historical progress and despite our laws, how far 
have we really come? Just when we thought that our Nation had built a 
foundation for peace and harmony, three attackers in a small town in 
Texas, shattered the illusion with an atrocity beyond imagination. The 
so-called ``dragging'' murder DEFIES the very fabric of the moral code 
that all Americans innately support. The moment that Mr. Byrd's 
tormentors chained his body against the cold, lifeless metal of their 
truck, they became something savage, something inhuman, and the very 
embodiment of hate criminals.

  African-Americans have historically been the most frequent targets of 
hate violence in the United States, and they are among its principal 
victims today in many states. From lynching to cross-burning, and 
church-burnings, antiblack violence has been, and still remains, the 
protypical hate crime--an action intended not simply to injure 
individuals but to intimidate an entire group of people. Hate crimes 
against African-Americans impact upon the entire society not only for 
the hurt they cause, but for the tragic history they recall and 
perpetuate.
  In March of 1997, Leonard Clark, a 13-year-old African-American 
teenager was riding his bicycle home one day in Chicago, when he was 
accosted and brutally beaten by three white teenagers. The perpetrators 
have been charged with attempted murder, aggravated battery and Hate 
Crimes under Illinois state law. However, the irony in this case is 
that one of the key witnesses to the beating remains missing. A federal 
hate crimes law would allow for the F.B.I.'s full involvement in this 
case, thereby increasing the chances of capture, and thus, justice.
  In my Congressional District in Houston in 1995, Fred Mangione, a 
homosexual, was stabbed to death, and his companion was brutally 
assaulted. The two men who were charged with Mangione's murder, claimed 
to be members of the ``German Peace Corps,'' which has been 
characterized in media reports as a neo-Nazi organization based in 
California. This crime did not meet the State of Texas' threshold for 
trial as a capital offense, because the murder did not occur during the 
commission of a rape or robbery.
  In recent years, attacks upon gays and lesbians are increasing in 
number and in severity. During 1995, 2,212 attacks on lesbians and gay 
men were documented--an 8% increase of the previous year.
  There have also been numerous attacks against Jews, Asians, 
Hispanics, and Native Americans. Fortunately, the Hate Crimes 
Prevention Act would protect these groups from targeted attacks because 
they are members of these groups.
  Examination of hate crimes statistics sadly reveals that Mr. Byrd's 
murder was not an isolated incident. The FBI releases the totals each 
year for hate crimes reported by state and local law enforcement 
agencies around the country based on race, religion, sexual orientation 
or ethnicity. These national totals have fluctuated--6,918 in 1992, 
7,587 in 1993, 5,852 in 1994, 7,947 in 1995, and 8,759 bias-motivated 
criminal incidents reported in 1996. Of the 8,759 incidents, 5,396 were 
motivated by racial bias; 1,401 by religious bias; 1,016 by sexual-
orientation bias; and 940 by ethnicity/national origin bias.
  A Hate Crimes Prevention Act would send a message that perpetrators 
of serious, violent hate crimes will be prosecuted to the fullest 
extent of the law. Hate crimes that cause death or bodily injury 
because of prejudice should be investigated federally, regardless of 
whether the victim was exercising a federally protected right.
  It is time for the Congress to act. Violence based on prejudice is a 
matter of national concern. Federal prosecutors should be empowered to 
punish if the states are unable or unwilling to do so.

                          ____________________