[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 152 (Wednesday, November 16, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12921-S12923]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE AND JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2006--CONFERENCE REPORT--Resumed
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the conference
report to accompany H.R. 2862, the Commerce, Justice, Science
Appropriations Act. While I will be voting for this conference report,
I have grave concerns regarding the cuts in the Edward Byrne Memorial
Justice Assistance Grants Program.
The Byrne/JAG program is the primary Federal assistance program for
State and local law enforcement's counter-drug activities. This program
is critical to fighting the domestic war on drugs. In my State of Iowa,
this grant program funds highly successful drug task forces. I fear
that without these grants, many of these task forces will disappear and
the threat from methamphetamine will only grow larger.
I have a letter from Sheriff Thomas Faust, the executive director of
the National Sheriff's Association. His letter raises many of the
concerns I have already highlighted with regard to the JAG program.
Sheriff Faust's letter warns that, ``Cuts of this magnitude seriously
inhibit law enforcement's abilities and endanger the safety and well
being of our communities! In order to keep communities safe from crime
and free of drugs, law enforcement must be given the resources they
need! The fiscal year 2006 CJS appropriations bill does not provide for
those resources.''
While I have fears that these cuts in the JAG program will have grave
results, because the conference report funds other critical programs, I
will vote in support of the conference report.
I ask unanimous consent to print the above-referenced letter in the
Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
National Sheriffs' Association,
Alexandria, VA, November 15, 2005.
Dear Senator: On behalf of the National Sheriffs'
Association (NSA) and our 23,000 members, I am writing to
express our extreme disappointment and concern over the lack
of funding for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance
Grants Program (JAG) in H.R. 2862, the Science, State,
Justice, Commerce and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill.
The JAG program, which was formed by consolidating the
Edward Byrne Memorial Grant program and the Local Law
Enforcement Block Grant program, is one of the primary
federal assistance programs for state, tribal and local law
enforcement agencies. State and local law enforcement
agencies, including the 3,087 sheriffs' offices across the
country, rely heavily on JAG funds for critical operational
activities. JAG funds support many of our counter-drug
activities, particularly drug task forces. Without these
funds, our sheriffs will not be able to sustain the task
forces or even fight the war on drugs!
Local law enforcement agencies from all across the country
are already out-manned and out-gunned by the drug cartels and
street gangs in our communities. Over the last several years
we have been forced to deal with the loss of personnel,
because of budget cuts to the COPS program. Now the COPS
Universal Hiring Program has been zeroed out by Congress,
thus abandoning an effective program, and the JAG Funds are
being cut as well. These cuts will put an end to any progress
that has been made and destroy any hope we might have of
winning the war on drugs or ridding our communities of
methamphetamine!
For more than a decade, the resources provided under the
JAG program have allowed law enforcement agencies to expand
their capabilities and make great strides in reducing the
incidence of crime in communities across the nation. It is
our belief that the lack of
[[Page S12922]]
federal support for local law enforcement will surely result
in increased crime and drug abuse!
The conference agreement would provide just $416 million
for the Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants, of which
only $321 million is available for local law enforcement
assistance. We find this level of funding to be unacceptable
and believe that Congress is failing to adequately recognize
the mission of law enforcement!
Cuts of this magnitude seriously inhibit law enforcement's
abilities and endanger the safety and well being of our
communities! In order to keep communities safe from crime and
free of drugs, law enforcement agencies must be given the
resources they need! The FY06 SSJC appropriations bill does
not provide for those resources.
At a time where law enforcement and securing the homeland
should be of the highest priority, Congress has chosen to
completely dismiss them as a priority! With the rise of
terrorism, and the fact that methamphetamine use and abuse
has risen to epidemic proportions, Congress should embrace
law enforcement, support the JAG program and COPS Hiring
Program, and increase their funding, not cut their funding!
Sincerely,
Thomas N. Faust,
Executive Director &
Retired Sheriff, Arlington County, VA.
Mr. HARKIN. This bill cuts over $200 million from the Byrne Justice
Assistance Grant Program and over $120 million from the COPS Program.
These cuts follow on 3 previous years of cuts that have decimated these
important and successful law enforcement assistance programs.
In 2002, Byrne was funded at $994 million. Next year, it will be
funded at only $416 million--a 60 percent cut.
I am also dismayed that after my amendment to add $34 million in
funding to legal services programs passed the Senate, not a single
dollar was included in the conference report. Meanwhile a study earlier
this year found that over half those eligible for legal aid cannot
receive the help they need with critical issues including custody,
child support, housing, and more critically right now, navigating
hurricane related bureaucracy.
These programs have now been cut so severely that law enforcement in
my State will likely be left with no alternatives to layoffs. That
simply isn't acceptable. While I will be voting for this conference
report because I believe that the appropriators did the best they could
within the situation they faced, I want to serve notice on the Senate
that we must restore funding to local law enforcement grant programs
and to legal assistance next year.
The fault for these drastic cuts to law enforcement programs lies
directly with the President and with every Member of Congress who voted
for his budget that cut $1.3 billion in law enforcement funding.
Appropriators only get a certain amount of money to work with, and that
money is set by the budget. It was literally impossible for
appropriators to restore all of the $1.3 billion in direct help for law
enforcement including over $150 million in cuts to victims, over $300
million in assistance to States overwhelmed with illegal aliens, over
$150 million in cuts to juvenile justice programs, almost $500 million
in cuts to the COPS Program and $800 million in cuts to the Byrne
Program.
It is simply outrageous that 54 Members of this Senate voted not to
restore this funding during the budget process and that all 55
Republicans voted for a budget that eliminated this funding. Any one of
those 55 people who stands up here and complains about these cuts is a
hypocrite because they allowed it to happen.
In my State of Iowa, these cuts that will mean a 42-percent reduction
in the amount of Byrne funding available statewide from $4.6 million
last year, down from $6.2 million the year before, to only $2.6
million. We will receive only $2.6 million to fund 25 drug task forces,
16 offender treatment programs, and 9 early intervention programs.
These cuts will come as my State continues to be in the middle of a
meth epidemic.
Our preliminary estimates are that this is going to mean the loss of
27 drug task force salaries and corresponding 1300 fewer arrests. It
will mean layoffs. There are no longer any alternatives. It will also
mean the loss of 22 Byrne funded programs including innovative and
successful treatment programs. These cuts will lead to at least 1,200
fewer meth addicts in prison receiving drug treatment. The result will
be to put addicts back on the streets where there crimes will escalate
and drive up the costs of prosecuting and incarcerating them the next
time around.
These cuts will be devastating. Between fiscal year 2003 and 2005 we
had already slashed over $1 billion in direct help to local law
enforcement officers. How much more can we expect our law enforcement
officers to take?
It is simply amazing to me that this administration and this Congress
could be so foolish as to slash funds from programs that work. Between
1993 and 2003, violent crime in this country declined by more than 50
percent--from 49.1 to 22.3 incidents of violence per 1,000 persons.
This is the exact same period of time when we provided over $1 billion
to the COPS and Byrne programs alone.
Even after cuts to the program, last year the Byrne Program funded
4,316 cops and prosecutors working on 764 drug enforcement task forces
nationally. Byrne funding led to 130,000 drug arrests in 32 States, the
seizure of 136 tons of illegal drugs, the confiscation of over 7,000
weapons, and the seizure of 7,691 meth labs. It is simply crazy that we
are slashing over $200 million from this program in this bill.
Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise in support of the conference report
accompanying H.R. 2862, the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2006, but I do so with some
reservations. To be sure, this bill funds many programs and agencies
vital to the Nation's security and economic strength, and the conferees
should be complimented for drafting a balanced spending bill. However,
this appropriations measure is also supposed to fund local law
enforcement and juvenile crime prevention programs, and in the past, it
did so successfully. Unfortunately, this year's version does not
adequately fulfill the very important responsibility of supporting law
enforcement and crime prevention programs.
Let us first consider the Edward J. Byrne Justice Assistance Grant
Program. For more than 30 years, Byrne grants have paid for State and
local drug task forces, community crime prevention programs, substance
abuse treatment programs, prosecution initiatives, and many other local
crime control programs. Talk to any police chief or sheriff back in
your home State and they will tell you that the Byrne program is the
backbone of Federal aid for local law enforcement. We should not walk
away from a program with more than 30 years of success supporting our
local police chiefs, sheriffs, and district attorneys.
Sadly, this conference report takes a step in that direction by
providing a little more than $416 million for the Byrne grant program.
That number represents a cut of more than $200 million from last year's
level. Slashing the Byrne program in this manner will have a real and
negative impact on local police departments, district attorneys, and
community crime prevention programs.
The COPS program is another victim of this conference report. Though
my colleagues should be commended for increasing the overall COPS
Program from last year's level of $388 million to $478 million this
year, I am discouraged that we have zeroed out the Universal Hiring
Program completely this year. We should remember that just 3 years ago,
the overall COPS program received more than a billion dollars, and $330
million of that was for the hiring program which simply puts more cops
on the streets. And that simply has led to a reduction in crime. Do we
want to risk this success by abandoning a program that works?
Perhaps the biggest disappointment is how the title V Local
Delinquency Prevention Program is treated in this appropriations bill.
The title V program is the only Federal program solely dedicated to
juvenile crime prevention, and the conference report dedicates $65
million to it. But after one takes away all of the national earmarks
that are housed in title V--all worthy programs that I support like the
Gang Resistance, Education and Training, GREAT Program--title V is left
with a mere $5 million to spread across the entire country. That amount
is not enough to build robust juvenile crime prevention programs. I
should hope that in the future, we can, at a minimum, fund the title V
program at the Senate-passed level of $80
[[Page S12923]]
million and do so free of national program earmarks. To be sure, these
other programs deserve federal dollars and should be funded as separate
line items in order that title V can have sufficient program funds to
operate successfully.
Make no mistake, juvenile crime prevention programs supported by
title V are worth our support. According to many experts in the field,
every dollar spent on prevention saves three or four dollars in costs
attributable to juvenile crime. And who can put a dollar value on the
hundreds, even thousands of young lives turned from crime and into
productive work and community life by the juvenile crime prevention
initiatives supported by title V? We can and must do better.
This conference report is the product of many long hours of
negotiations and hard work. Subcommittee Chairman Shelby and Ranking
Member Mikulski and their staffs deserve praise for a balanced product.
Indeed, this bill is the result of compromise and I will vote in favor
of it. But I hope that next year we can do a better job at helping our
overworked local police officers and giving a ray of hope for
disadvantaged children who desperately need our help.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I rise today to voice my disappointment
with respect to the funding level provided for Project Safe
Neighborhoods in the fiscal year 2006 Commerce, Justice, and Science
Appropriations conference report.
The President's Project Safe Neighborhoods has been one of the most
incredibly successful crime prevention programs in our Nation. And
today, we passed appropriations with tragically low funding for this
important program that has been highly effective at removing from our
streets criminals who use guns to carry out their crimes.
When I was Attorney General of Texas, I joined with then Governor
Bush to launch Texas Exile. That program, modeled after the effective
Project Exile in Richmond, VA, also was extraordinarily successful--
providing local prosecutors with the funds to get more than 2,000 guns
off the streets and to issue more than 1,500 indictments for gun
crimes, resulting in almost 1,200 convictions in its first 3 years of
existence alone.
And when President Bush came to Washington, he built upon our success
in Texas by making Project Safe Neighborhoods one of his top priorities
and launching the Project Exile program nationally--providing badly
needed resources to jurisdictions throughout the country to combat gun
related crimes.
And in the short time this initiative has been up and running, the
results have been astonishing. Project Safe Neighborhoods' prosecution,
prevention and deterrence efforts have helped fuel historical lows in
gun crime across America as well as a 30-year low in the violent crime
victimization rate. Over the past 4 years, Federal gun crime
prosecutions have increased by 76 percent--and virtually all of these
criminals spend time in prison--for example, 94 percent in fiscal year
2004.
The administration has devoted over $1.3 billion to implement Project
Safe Neighborhoods since its inception in 2001. These funds have been
used to hire almost 200 new Federal prosecutors dedicated to gun crime
and provide grants to hire approximately 540 new State and local gun
prosecutors.
While I appreciate any effort this body might take to embrace fiscal
discipline--I question the efficacy of choosing to cut a program that
literally is saving thousands of lives nationwide and making our
society increasingly safer just as we are seeing the significant
successes resulting from it.
The additional Federal funding for these State and local gun
prosecutors, as well as the associated community outreach efforts and
other important initiatives are critical to the success of the program
and to the national reduction of violent crime.
That is why I was so concerned when I learned of the shortfall in
this funding. None of the $73,800,000 in grants for State and local
governments requested by President Bush was included initially in
either the House or Senate.
And I was not alone. Chairman Specter and Senators Grassley, Kyl,
Sessions and Coburn from the Judiciary Committee as well as Senators
Santorum and Lugar joined me in requesting full funding for the program
in a letter dated September 8, 2005.
And, I must thank my colleague from Alabama, Senator Shelby, as well
as fellow Texan, Congressman Jim Culberson, and their respective
staffs, for their help in achieving at least a minimal amount of
funding of $15 million that we were able to get into the conference
report.
The Project Safe Neighborhoods program serves as a model of
coordinated government efforts--with Federal, State and local
governments sharing the burden of prosecuting criminals and
coordinating their resources to do so. At a time when some Federal
agencies struggle to coordinate efficiently with state and local
governments--the Project Safe Neighborhoods program serves as a model
of efficiency and effectiveness.
In closing, while I voted in favor of the appropriations conference
report because of its many important programs--I remain committed to
seeking full funding for Project Safe Neighborhoods next year and in
the years to come and looking forward to working with my colleagues to
ensure that we keep America's streets safe from violent gun-using
criminals.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is on
agreeing to the conference report to accompany H.R. 2862.
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Corzine)
is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 94, nays 5, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 329 Leg.]
YEAS--94
Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Allen
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Byrd
Cantwell
Carper
Chafee
Chambliss
Clinton
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
DeWine
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Frist
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Isakson
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Salazar
Santorum
Sarbanes
Schumer
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Wyden
NAYS--5
Baucus
Coburn
Conrad
Dayton
Thomas
NOT VOTING--1
Corzine
The conference report was agreed to.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move
to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
____________________