[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 167 (Wednesday, October 31, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H12351-H12352]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            FACTS ABOUT NICS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to 
some inaccurate information being spread on H.R. 2640, the NICS 
Improvement Amendments Act. As you know, Federal law prohibits nine 
groups of individuals from obtaining a firearm. One such group includes 
individuals who are determined to be mentally ill or who were committed 
to a mental institution. These determinations and commitments are made 
in accordance with the State law and always in accordance with due 
process. One purpose of H.R. 2640 is to ensure that information on 
these people make it into the Federal gun background check system.
  According to officials at the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA 
officials make no determination or commitment regarding the legal 
mental health status of any of our veterans. However, some groups 
continue to believe that the VA is sending data to the NICS system on 
veterans who do not meet the disqualification of gun rights.
  To ensure our veterans are not losing their gun rights, I included 
several protective provisions in H.R. 2640. These provisions ensure two 
things. First, the VA will only provide records on veterans determined 
by the same procedures that apply to nonveterans in regards to mental 
health. Second, they require that the removal from NICS of a veteran's 
records that do not meet the law's standards.
  The intent and purpose of these sections is clear. NICS should only 
have information on veterans disqualified

[[Page H12352]]

because they were legally determined to be mentally ill or 
involuntarily committed to a mental institution. The VA will not 
transfer information on veterans who just were treated for 
posttraumatic syndrome or who have a VA disability rating based on some 
mental health problem that does not reach the legal threshold of mental 
illness within the State.
  In addition, I recognize that mental illness is not necessarily a 
permanent impediment. Since the State made the initial determination of 
mental illness, that State should be able to remove that determination. 
H.R. 2640 contains a section to address this section.
  If a State elects to receive funds authorized by H.R. 2640, it must 
establish a procedure to review and, if appropriate, reverse mental 
health status. A veteran or any other individual will be able to apply 
to a State court, board, commission or any other lawful authority. That 
authority would review the person's situation. It is up to the State to 
set up and determine how the procedure will operate in accordance with 
due process. I expect that a State would use the same process that it 
uses to make the initial determination or commitment.
  H.R. 2640 does not change how a person is found to be disqualified 
from obtaining or possessing a gun. The language and procedures of the 
Gun Control Act of 1968 remain in effect. The bill does, however, 
insist that NICS receives only records on disqualified persons, whether 
a veteran or nonveteran.
  H.R. 2640 would also allow States to establish procedures that permit 
a person disqualified on the basis of legal mental illness to prove to 
the State that he or she no longer poses a danger to society.
  I believe that H.R. 2640 is fair and it is balanced. I am hoping the 
other body will soon approve the bill so that the States will be 
encouraged to provide information that improves the background check 
system on gun purchases. This was a bill that was worked out together 
here in the House. It had strong bipartisan support. If the bill had 
been placed when it was first passed in the year 2002, there is a 
possibility that Mr. Cho from Virginia Tech would not have been able to 
obtain a gun and commit the unfortunate murders that he did.
  Mr. Speaker, it is common sense that when you work with the NRA, and 
certainly those that consider me a fair person on reducing gun violence 
in this country, that we need to get the other body to pass this bill 
so we can save lives.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  (Mr. DeFAZIO addressed the House. His remarks will appear hereafter 
in the Extensions of Remarks.)

                          ____________________